Would 1080ti sli perform better in 4k than in 1080p with an i78700k and 64gigs of ram?

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
A

ambarish kumar

Honorable
Dec 2, 2014
24
0
10,510
Urgent please.I need advice
I have decided to upgrade my system from an i73770k to an i78700k and 1080 ti sli.The problem is I cant figure out if I should go with a 1080p screen or a 4k screen.I am mostly an fps player and I value higher frames and refresh hertz over higher resolution anyday,provided it is native.So I heard people saying that at lower resolutions the cpu would be the bottleneck and at higher frames the gpu would be the bottleneck.But it doesnt seem to make any sense as the higher the resolution the lower the fps right?Can someone clarify this statement for me.And yes,this is my setup:-

CPU:-i7 8700k
GPU:-1080ti sli(2-way)
RAM:- 64gb (4x16gb)Kingston Value RAM 2400mhz ddr4 cas17
MOBO:-ROG Maximus X hero
CPU COOLER:- Kraken X62
Case:-CM Cosmos 2 black full tower
PSU:-1000w corsair rmx
SSD for os:-Samsung 950 pro 256gb
HDD:-WD Caviar 5tb
SSD with video editing files:-950 pro 256 gb
1080p choice monitor:-240hz 1ms benqxl2540 1080p

So,why would I need a 4k monitor?Most 4ks are 60hz.And i wouldnt benefit much from it as an fps person.
 
Solution
Phaaze88
No, the 8700k is darn good. But in the scenarios(at 1080p) where the 1080ti SLI works, even that cpu would have trouble keeping up.
And no, the 7900x is not better, except in a few benchmarks. Benchmarks ≠ actual usage scenarios.
4133mhz ram isn't necessary either(3000 - 3600 is good enough), plus the motherboard may not support that speed.

To get the most out of that SLI, a 4k monitor is a must. But as an fps player, that's a no go, as fps average would be below 100.
You want 1080p 240hz then, yes? As I stated in my earlier post, a balanced system is important for maximum performance.
The 1080ti SLI - when it works - is too powerful for 1080p high refresh gaming.
That SLI is churning out frames like a beast, but your cpu(which is the...
Sort by date Sort by votes
Buying even a single 1080ti is wasted on just 1080p 60Hz. If you are going to SLI two of the most powerful cards offered from Nvidia, don't cheap out on the monitor. Go with 4k or a widescreen 3440x1440 if you want to take advantage of the two cards properly. Otherwise there is no point in buying such expensive GPUs.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote


I am buying a 1080p 240hz monitor not 60hz.I am buying them to get the maximum fps and refresh rate.I said so with my system specs.Did you read them?I am an fps player and am also looking for future proofing

 
Upvote 0 Downvote
You can also think about 1440p with 144-165Hz monitor. I currently have the Acer Predator 27" 1440p 144Hz G-sync and love it. I was going to upgrade my GPU but not at these prices. With a GTX970 I have to turn down some setting to keep the frame rate up - 1080Ti would be sweet.
-Bruce
BTW My updated computer is:
Asus PRIME Z370-A i7-8700K OC 5.0GHZ Corsair H100iV2 16G Dual Chan DDR4
3200 Trident Asus GeForce GTX 970 Strix Samsung 960 Pro M.2, Plextor M.2 256GB
SSD XFX PRO 750W XTR Gold
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
In a sense, you answered your own question.
*Fps player - prioritizes high refresh over all
A 4k monitor shouldn't even be considered an option. Therefore, it should be a 1080p 240hz monitor(a 1440p/165hz one would be OK'ish)... problem is, your SLI'd 1080tis are mad overkill at 1080p. Wasted money, power(they'll never get to flex their 'muscles'), and SLI/CF isn't widely supported - some of the ones that are supported were crudely programmed to do so, thus negligible performance increase or some other issues.

A balanced system is important to maximize performance. The weakest links in your current setup would be the 'slow' 2400mhz ram(ram size over speed was a backwards move) and not surprisingly, the cpu. But, if I were to look at it another way, it's the 2 1080tis. It's looks like you took a mid-range car(cpu, ram, etc), and slapped a V10(the SLI) in there!

TL;DR - Since you already have the SLI, you may as well get a 4k or 1440p monitor, but you can forget about the high fps that's so important to such players - some 1440p have up to 165hz, but that may not be enough for you. Or you can sell one card and then get the 1080p 240hz.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote


So you're saying,I shouldn't have bought the 8700k but better one like the 7900x and faster ram like 4133mhz to use the full potential of sli?

 
Upvote 0 Downvote


Also as games are moving towards using more cores and as it helps in editing,would it be a better future-proof option to buy a 7900x?Thanks.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
No, the 8700k is darn good. But in the scenarios(at 1080p) where the 1080ti SLI works, even that cpu would have trouble keeping up.
And no, the 7900x is not better, except in a few benchmarks. Benchmarks ≠ actual usage scenarios.
4133mhz ram isn't necessary either(3000 - 3600 is good enough), plus the motherboard may not support that speed.

To get the most out of that SLI, a 4k monitor is a must. But as an fps player, that's a no go, as fps average would be below 100.
You want 1080p 240hz then, yes? As I stated in my earlier post, a balanced system is important for maximum performance.
The 1080ti SLI - when it works - is too powerful for 1080p high refresh gaming.
That SLI is churning out frames like a beast, but your cpu(which is the top gaming cpu at the moment) and ram can't keep up at that resolution.
This would be balanced out with the 4k monitor, but you will not get high fps. See the dilemma here?

If you still want the high fps, sell one of those cards and get the 1080p 240hz monitor, otherwise get the 4k, as that's what would work best with your current setup.

EDIT: games using that many cores on average is something you won't be seeing ANY time soon. 6 cores isn't even that common yet. I'd give it 15+ years before 10 becomes a thing, if that even becomes necessary...
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Solution

Yeah,I get it.So basically what you're saying is that I would see an appropriate and justifiable performance with the 1080ri sli at 4k than at 1080p.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Just to answer your question about lower resolution need a better CPU than higher resolution. The frame rate is limited by which ever component is working the hardest, so on high resolution it's the GPU/s that are working hard. However, once you run lower resolution the GPU is doing it so easy that the CPU can't feed it information fast enough to keep up.
Most modern games still prefer higher CPU frequency over core count, the 8700k is a good choice.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote


Could you recommend a good 144/165hz 1440p 27" as a second monitor with low input lag and if possible IPS.I'd love to add that to my setup?

 
Upvote 0 Downvote
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom