[SOLVED] Yet another GPU buying suggestion...

[jonesmalaco]

OK, I know there are a lot of threads on the matter, but I have to ask anyways... With Black Friday around the corner, I'm pretty much thinking about investing in a new GPU. My PC is plugged in a TV than runs 4K at 60Hz (so 60 FPS is the limit). It's a 55 inch, so I guess one can really tell the difference between a game running on 4K, and one running at 1080p (I guess that at way smaller monitors, resolution is less noticeable... FPS is more important) I've read that only the RTX 2080 Ti is capable of pushing constant 60 FPS at 4K. Is that accurate? Because obviously, the price is really (and expectedly) steep. Where I live, this particular GPU is impossible to buy on retail. It goes out for 4x the price, so yes, roughly 5 thousand american dollars... Forget it.

I guess I'd be able to find someone to bring me the card from abroad. but even at 1250, it's still a lot of money. So I guess my real questions are:

• Is it really worth the money?
• Are there all-in-one watercooled options for the RTX's?
• Technically, what is the difference of running a heavy game like Metro Exodus on ultra settings with ray tracing on (I'm not sure if even that monster of a GPU can push 60 FPS at 4K with a "graphic hungry" game like that... can it?) from running the same game with "only high settings" (as opposed to ultra), with ray tracing off? Can a "cheaper" card (2080 Super , 2070, 2060) push 60 FPS at 4K?

Well, ATM I game on a watercooled 970, which I bought in 2015... At that time, exchange rates were lower (so I could obviously buy more american dollars with less local currency), and it have served me pretty well ever since... And, since's it's watercooled (the processor is watercooled also), I can get some overclocking, and it runs almost all games at 60 FPS constant at 1080p... They obviously look really good, but I was thinking to use the 4K TV for more than just watching movies... I mean, PS4 games look cool in 4K, but I just can't cope with the 30 FPS limit... I mean, all games that offer 60 FPS at 1080p (Last of Us Remastered, God of War), I go for that option. (I know I spoke before about the TV vs. monitor thing, but to me FPS is way more important than resolution)

Besides, I'd probably have to also upgrade all the other stuff to run an RTX card, correct? Such as: processor (currently on an "old" i5 4670K @ 3.40 GHz), motherboard (currently an ASUS Maximum Hero VI) and a 750W power supply (not sure if it's enough to push an RTX)... Besides, not even sure if such GPU even fits my current case Can I run an RTX on these specs?

Thanks, and sorry about the long post.

 

[bmockeg]

No GPU is worth $1200. I could barely justify spending $700 on a 1080ti. I would wait till next summer when there are new AMD, Nvidia and Intel cards on the market.

 

[velocityg4]

Most of the benchmarks are also set at ultra quality. As a 2070 Super is close most of the time. If you crank some of the other settings down a little. I should think it would sustain 4K at 60FPS. As some hardly noticeable detail changes can greatly effect FPS.

Heck try the 970 at 4K. But crank everything to minimum and see how it does. Then start turning up the various details. It won't hurt anything. Anything on a 2070 Super should be at least 50% faster. Probably 100% on graphics heavy but light CPU games. Ones where you already get high FPS on a 970 will likely be CPU bound before maxing out a 2070 Super.

It also depends on the game. Most games are not that demanding. Only recent AAA titles. Games a few years old and most of the lighter current titles will be a breeze for the GPU at 4K.

Even a 2080 Ti can't handle every single game at 4K, 60FPS and Ultra Quality.

Nvidia GeForce RTX 2080 Super Review

We have the final piece in Nvidia's Super puzzle. Coming in at the same $700 price point, the new GeForce RTX 2080 Super offers some performance increases,...

www.techspot.com

 

[jonesmalaco]

No GPU is worth $1200. I could barely justify spending $700 on a 1080ti. I would wait till next summer when there are new AMD, Nvidia and Intel cards on the market.

Yeah, gotta agree with you mate... I mean, I saved some money, but I guess I'm not ready to spend that much on a card, especially if it won't hit the 60 FPS mark at 4K with no drops.

Most of the benchmarks are also set at ultra quality. As a 2070 Super is close most of the time. If you crank some of the other settings down a little. I should think it would sustain 4K at 60FPS. As some hardly noticeable detail changes can greatly effect FPS.

Heck try the 970 at 4K. But crank everything to minimum and see how it does. Then start turning up the various details. It won't hurt anything. Anything on a 2070 Super should be at least 50% faster. Probably 100% on graphics heavy but light CPU games. Ones where you already get high FPS on a 970 will likely be CPU bound before maxing out a 2070 Super.

It also depends on the game. Most games are not that demanding. Only recent AAA titles. Games a few years old and most of the lighter current titles will be a breeze for the GPU at 4K.

Even a 2080 Ti can't handle every single game at 4K, 60FPS and Ultra Quality.

Nvidia GeForce RTX 2080 Super Review

We have the final piece in Nvidia's Super puzzle. Coming in at the same $700 price point, the new GeForce RTX 2080 Super offers some performance increases,...

www.techspot.com

Thanks for the link mate. After checking it out, yeah... a couple of these new games (namely Metro and Tomb Raider) are a real strain on the RTX's. Damn.

Well, the 970 on 1080p can't even hold a steady 60FPS with The Witcher 3 (as you know, a 2015 game)... I run with some stuff on high, some on medium and (obviously) hairWorks off, and the FPS gets dropped to between 40-45 FPS sometimes. At 4K it will probably play from 15-20 FPS...