What resolution/refresh rate to go for?

[code99cc]

Hello,

I am aware that there are lots of similar question already, ive read a lot of threads about this but none that I could find had my hardware combo ... and im still undecided anyway


Im soon getting a Sapphire Radeon RX Vega 56 Nitro card from a friend for cheap (its almost brand new and a deal thats too good to pass up) and since im doing that I also want to upgrade my monitor since this one is rather old and lackluster.
My current monitor is a 24inch Dell (idk the model, was given to me for free by someone) with a 1080p resolution and 60hz refresh rate.

With an i7 4790 and a Vega 56, what resolution/refresh rate combo would you suggest for a 27inch monitor?

This of course is for gaming.
Im not a hardcore player and I play a wide variety of games (except racing and sports games) and I prefer to run my games at high settings if possible but i wont sacrifice fps to achieve that.

My budget would be around 400-450 euros (MAYBE 500 if i really want something really bad)

 

[cryoburner]

Vega 56 should be able to handle 1440p pretty well in today's games. In most current games, it should be able to maintain over 60fps with max graphics settings at that resolution, and in many older or less demanding titles it could push over 100.

And the 4790 is still a reasonably good CPU. While it might not be quite as fast as the current generation models, at 1440p resolution the graphics card will likely be the limiting factor more often than not.

I don't know exactly what pricing will be like in your country, but I suspect you should be able to find some 27", 1440p, 144Hz screens with FreeSync for around that amount.

 

[code99cc]

Vega 56 should be able to handle 1440p pretty well in today's games. In most current games, it should be able to maintain over 60fps with max graphics settings at that resolution, and in many older or less demanding titles it could push over 100.

And the 4790 is still a reasonably good CPU. While it might not be quite as fast as the current generation models, at 1440p resolution the graphics card will likely be the limiting factor more often than not.

I don't know exactly what pricing will be like in your country, but I suspect you should be able to find some 27", 1440p, 144Hz screens with FreeSync for around that amount.

Ok, but whats the point in getting a 144hz display if my card wont be able to reach 80+ fps to benefit from a high refresh rate monitor?

Ive seen more people suggest i get a 1440p 144hz display even tho i cant utilize it at full potential and I dont understand why.

 

[cryoburner]

Well, I suppose it's mainly for smoother motion in those older or otherwise less demanding games that can be pushed at those frame rates, or for things like competitive shooters where you might decide to drop the graphics settings down a little to get better FPS. This also leaves open the possibility of viewing higher frame rates in these games should you decide to upgrade to another, faster graphics card a few years down the line. Some 144Hz monitors will also feature faster pixel-response times and in turn less blurring, though that's heavily dependent on their panel type (TN, IPS, VA), and the specific monitor in question. I believe some 1440p, 144Hz monitors should fit within your price range, though again, that depends on what pricing is like in your country.

Of course, there are other options. It's certainly possible to find 60/75Hz 1440p screens for less, and those could be a decent option, even if they don't provide the ability to display higher frame rates. Again, I would look for one with FreeSync adaptive sync to go with a Vega card though, as it shouldn't add much to the cost, and will allow you to avoid screen tearing or stuttering in situations where the frame rate dip below 60fps, and won't add as much latency as Vsync.

Or a high refresh rate 2560x1080 ultrawide might be a good option, as you would be able to hit higher frame rates at that resolution. I would go for more than 27" on an ultrawide screen though. Due to the way screens are measured diagonally, because of the more elongated aspect ratio, a 27" ultrawide will actually be rather similar in size to a 24" 16:9 monitor. It will be wider, but also more than 10% shorter, making the total area work out to about the same. For an ultrawide, you would have to move up to at least 29.5" to get the same total area as a 27" 16:9 screen, and the same height as a 24" screen. Also, some games (especially older ones) may not natively support a 21:9 aspect ratio, in which case you'll be playing them at regular 1080p with black bars on the sides if you can't find a patch or other way to make that aspect ratio work. You could still benefit from the higher refresh rate in those cases though. The same also applies to most online videos, which are typically in a 16:9 format.

 

[code99cc]

Well, I suppose it's mainly for smoother motion in those older or otherwise less demanding games that can be pushed at those frame rates, or for things like competitive shooters where you might decide to drop the graphics settings down a little to get better FPS. This also leaves open the possibility of viewing higher frame rates in these games should you decide to upgrade to another, faster graphics card a few years down the line. Some 144Hz monitors will also feature faster pixel-response times and in turn less blurring, though that's heavily dependent on their panel type (TN, IPS, VA), and the specific monitor in question. I believe some 1440p, 144Hz monitors should fit within your price range, though again, that depends on what pricing is like in your country.

Of course, there are other options. It's certainly possible to find 60/75Hz 1440p screens for less, and those could be a decent option, even if they don't provide the ability to display higher frame rates. Again, I would look for one with FreeSync adaptive sync to go with a Vega card though, as it shouldn't add much to the cost, and will allow you to avoid screen tearing or stuttering in situations where the frame rate dip below 60fps, and won't add as much latency as Vsync.

Or a high refresh rate 2560x1080 ultrawide might be a good option, as you would be able to hit higher frame rates at that resolution. I would go for more than 27" on an ultrawide screen though. Due to the way screens are measured diagonally, because of the more elongated aspect ratio, a 27" ultrawide will actually be rather similar in size to a 24" 16:9 monitor. It will be wider, but also more than 10% shorter, making the total area work out to about the same. For an ultrawide, you would have to move up to at least 29.5" to get the same total area as a 27" 16:9 screen, and the same height as a 24" screen. Also, some games (especially older ones) may not natively support a 21:9 aspect ratio, in which case you'll be playing them at regular 1080p with black bars on the sides if you can't find a patch or other way to make that aspect ratio work. You could still benefit from the higher refresh rate in those cases though. The same also applies to most online videos, which are typically in a 16:9 format.

Thanks a bunch!