Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Solved

How much difference will i see going from a 1080p to 1440p?

Tags:
Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
May 26, 2013 4:43:28 PM

Is the difference huge?

I have a 24" 1920x1200 monitor, its about 3 years old now. And I'm running a 670, I'm interested in a 1440.

I'm not a crazy BF type gamer or anything, but I am a big time PC gamer in general ranging from games like Witcher 2, BioShock Infinite etc and MMOs.

Is the upgrade justified, what I mean is will Isee a ssignificant upgrade from my older monitor?

More about : difference 1080p 1440p

Best solution

May 26, 2013 4:53:16 PM

The 1440p resolution will look a lot nicer. The more pixels make dark colors dark and light colors really pop. If you do upgrade your monitor be advised that gaming at that resolution with a 2GB card will surely cripple your fps. If your GTX 670 is a 4GB model then you should be fine, but the low memory bus and bandwidth still hinders fps. You can always upgrade the monitor but play at 1080p, but what's the point of that. You can get by with lowering the settings a bit, but don't expect to go ultra settings on 1440p with a 2GB card.

It's up to you if you are willing to upgrade the monitor at the cost of FPS. Don't get me wrong 1440p monitors are excellent and if you get one, you will surely never go back to 1080p, but you need the right hardware to pull it off.
Share
May 26, 2013 5:09:01 PM

But how much are we talking? Like am I going to be looking at a slide show for offline typical gaming at times? Or is it more like losing some frames for if I was trying to achieve benchmarks?

Down the road I do plan to upgrade probably a whole new machine, so that is in the works.

I mean I don't need games set to ultra to be happy, but I just would want a 700 buck monitor to be worth it.
m
0
l
Related resources
May 26, 2013 9:00:03 PM

Trust me a 1440p monitor is worth it, you can look at some benchmarks and see that GTX 670 2GB is enough to play games at playable fps if you turn down the AA settings. I'm just saying that don't expect 60fps across the board with every game with that resolution.

Also seeing as how you plan on upgrading to a whole new machine in the future, then I would more than likely suggest you get yourself a 1440p monitor now so you know what you need in the parts of the future machine.
m
0
l
May 27, 2013 4:22:27 AM

what is your mobo as you may plan to sli gtx 670 later
m
0
l
May 27, 2013 9:50:35 AM

CrushIce said:
Trust me a 1440p monitor is worth it, you can look at some benchmarks and see that GTX 670 2GB is enough to play games at playable fps if you turn down the AA settings. I'm just saying that don't expect 60fps across the board with every game with that resolution.

Also seeing as how you plan on upgrading to a whole new machine in the future, then I would more than likely suggest you get yourself a 1440p monitor now so you know what you need in the parts of the future machine.


Is it true as I've read that with these monitors aa isn't as important?

I bought the Asus monitor, I guess I'm just hoping that I can at least enjoy my games as is and get a sharper image. I'm not out to light the world on fire with my PC, but I do like to make sure the money I spend is worth while.

Would jumping to a 780 for instance, be a much better compliment to the 1440p?
m
0
l
May 27, 2013 9:54:38 AM

the difference would be very big trust me!
m
0
l
May 27, 2013 10:50:24 AM

savatage79 said:
Is it true as I've read that with these monitors aa isn't as important?

I bought the Asus monitor, I guess I'm just hoping that I can at least enjoy my games as is and get a sharper image. I'm not out to light the world on fire with my PC, but I do like to make sure the money I spend is worth while.

Would jumping to a 780 for instance, be a much better compliment to the 1440p?


At higher resolution the jagged lines are less prominent but they are still there. You don't have to worry too much with your GTX 670 tho. If you do however get a GTX 780 it would REALLY compliment your monitor well. The 3GB of VRAM, higher memory bus and bandwidth will let you enjoy your games at higher settings with less of an impact on performance.
m
0
l
May 27, 2013 12:40:49 PM

How is microstutter these days? I never liked sli because of it.

Would adding another 670 be ideal? How would 2 670s compare to a 780? I just hope I don't regret dropping 650 on a monitor.
m
0
l
June 10, 2013 11:07:32 PM

Most the people dont find microstutter these days unless you are closely look for it
m
0
l
June 13, 2013 5:34:50 AM

I'm currently running gtx780s SLI and it deff compliments my 1440p monitor well. Nothing you get will be 100% perfect though. 1 gtx780 runs anything on all ultra settings at 1080p no problem. However jumping to 1440p is a different story. With games like SC2, BF3, things like that you should be fine. However with games like crysis, even 2 780s SLI you need to turn the graphics down quite a bit to get a good framerate.

The only other thing about 1440p which you'll prolly notice is that the icons on your screen are about to become freaking tiny haha.

I have a Shimian qh270 monitor and it's nice because it's IPS yet I have overclocked it to get a good 70hz out of the refresh rate.

Anyways, I wish you the best. To be 100% honest though, when I went to 1440p, I didn't really notice much of a difference aside from my home screen. Most games looked pretty much the same. I guess I have bad eyes. I am big on glossy screens. For some reason I just love em. However my qh270 decided not to come with one :( 
m
0
l
June 13, 2013 8:32:42 AM

BigMack70 said:
xxxlun4icexxx said:
However with games like crysis, even 2 780s SLI you need to turn the graphics down quite a bit to get a good framerate.


:heink:  I am averaging 60fps in Crysis 3 campaign (by far the most graphically demanding game out there) with max settings and 2xSMAA... if you are having framerate problems, it is not because 780 SLI is underpowered



at 1440p? Yeah I deff am not having the same experience. I originally maxed everything and had it at 8X but it was pretty bad so I turned it down. Once I got it to 2x it was ok but when I use NVidia shield and optimize it, it turns it down to 1XSMAA. It also defaults objects to be turned down to medium. I guess I don't know what my problem is? =/

MSI afterburner is showing that both GPUs are at 100% processing power too for the most part

m
0
l
June 13, 2013 8:37:57 AM

BigMack70 said:
Yeah 8xMSAA is a performance killer but at 2xSMAA or less you should either be at or somewhat near 60fps average in crysis 3 at 1440p on 780 SLI


Hm... I wonder what might be causing my issue then... Possibly too low power supply? (currently using an 850Watt), or maybe my cpu, I7 3820?

Dunno, I'll have to monkey around with it some more. I just put in the 2nd card yesterday so maybe I have missed some settings somewhere.

Thanks for letting me know though that it should be more efficient.
m
0
l
June 13, 2013 8:46:20 AM

BigMack70 said:
What clocks are your 780s running at in-game? Mine are boosting to a constant 1100 MHz each


I'll have to check. I havent done any overclocking whatsoever. Whatever MSI loads as defaults is what I've kept it at. Is it as easy as just moving the slider to 1100 MHz and letting everything else figure itself out from the default settings?
m
0
l
June 13, 2013 8:56:00 AM

Ah I gotcha. I dont think my post registered before but I was saying that I wonder if my cards are turning down due to heat. When I installed the 2nd one yesterday I noticed that these cards are very very close to each other. The SLI 660s I had, had a bit more room to breathe. These however are pretty sandwhiched (not touching though). Temps stay at about 80-82 during extended play. Maybe that's just normal (fans at about 40-50%).

Anyways, it doesnt matter which card is actually doing the displaying correct? What I mean by that is, when I had my 660s in, the top card was the one that had a display connected, now the bottom card is the one doing the displaying. For some reason when I hooked my DVI-dual into the top card's port, it would not register with the display or show anything. Only the bottom card's port would. But regardless, MSI shows that during games both GPUs are at about 100% GPU usage.
m
0
l
June 13, 2013 10:06:20 AM

BigMack70 said:
I'm not sure about which card has to display with SLI, and yeah it could be a temperature issue causing your cards to downclock - my cards have space to breathe and the top card is typically in the 70-73C range


Later today I'll take a few screenshots of FPS/benchmark/diagnostics/etc. and upload them. If you dont mind I'd appreciate you just taking a peek and letting me know if they are normal or not =].
m
0
l
June 13, 2013 12:41:53 PM

BigMack70 said:
I'm not sure about which card has to display with SLI, and yeah it could be a temperature issue causing your cards to downclock - my cards have space to breathe and the top card is typically in the 70-73C range


When you're playing do you enable Vsync?
m
0
l
June 13, 2013 3:03:18 PM

Ok so I just checked and while running crysis 3 both core clocks were running at 862.
m
0
l
June 13, 2013 3:24:03 PM

I'm glad your getting help with your situation lun4ice, but this isn't your thread. I don't want to sound like an ass, but your better off making yourself a thread that way it'll be easier for yourself and others.
m
0
l
June 17, 2013 6:10:09 AM

BigMack70 said:
That's why my framerates are higher... my cards are essentially applying a 27% overclock compared to that. You can try overclocking your cards and/or setting up a custom fan profile to keep them cooler so they don't throttle down.


First of all, sorry about hijacking the thread.

2nd, I am going to try to somehow find a way to increase airflow. I'm not really sure how to because the aurora chassis that I have fits 2 660s well but 780s are just scrunched together.

Anyways, would it be safe for the card to manipulate a fan profile that used it's max percentage? For instance once I used MSI Afterburner's profile, the clock speed was at about 950, and at 80 degrees on GPU2, the fans are at about 70%. Is it safe to turn the fans up to say 80-85% at that temp? Does using the higher fan percentage greatly impact fan life?
m
0
l
June 17, 2013 7:07:05 PM

BigMack70 said:
And you only need to listen to thread hijack warnings from moderators, and CrushIce is not a moderator.

I was just implying that it would be easier for him to get answers for him to make his own thread to track. Also usually in big forums like this there is a common courtesy in taking over other people's threads. It's one thing to continue to asks questions relevant to what the original topic was, but now it has totally deviated from that. Also the OP hasn't even replied to this thread in a while. I'm not going to make a big thing out of this because like you said I am NOT a moderator. Do what you must.
m
0
l
June 18, 2013 7:42:42 AM

BigMack70 said:
It's safe to do whatever you want with fan profile, I'm sure there is an impact on fan life but there is no way to know what that could be. I had a pair of 7970 Lightning cards running around 80% fan speed 24/7 for over a year with no issues.

And you only need to listen to thread hijack warnings from moderators, and CrushIce is not a moderator.


Thanks man! I actually downloaded a different tool besides MSI afterburner. I downloaded EVGA precision X and gave that a try. It was a bit easier for me to understand. Anyways, I moved the "Target Temp" to 85 which raised the power input to like 103%ish? Then I also changed the fans so they come on at like 85%ish around 78-80 degrees.

The GPUs didnt even get about 75 and I was getting 60 FPS on the same settings you were (crysis 3) =D. My clock speed still seemed to stay below yours though. My clock speed was staying 998 which is deff higher than the previous ones I was getting. Havent been able to get them above 1k though.

It's so dumb though that while playing Crysis 1 the framerate is still just a s*** show.

Thanks again man I appreciate it.
m
0
l
September 12, 2013 9:14:29 PM

CrushIce said:
BigMack70 said:
And you only need to listen to thread hijack warnings from moderators, and CrushIce is not a moderator.

I was just implying that it would be easier for him to get answers for him to make his own thread to track. Also usually in big forums like this there is a common courtesy in taking over other people's threads. It's one thing to continue to asks questions relevant to what the original topic was, but now it has totally deviated from that. Also the OP hasn't even replied to this thread in a while. I'm not going to make a big thing out of this because like you said I am NOT a moderator. Do what you must.



you were simply being a polite, courteous, and respectful forum member and human being. the thread-jacker for lack of a better term, wasn't being malicious I don't think, just careless at best, ignorant at worst. Perhaps somewhere in between. Bigmack70 however - what a douchebag. Seriously, go play in a fire.
m
0
l
November 18, 2013 4:03:09 PM

2GB is wonderful. That is of course assuming you have Quad-SLI in your system lol.
m
0
l
16 minutes ago

savatage79 said:
But how much are we talking? Like am I going to be looking at a slide show for offline typical gaming at times? Or is it more like losing some frames for if I was trying to achieve benchmarks?

Down the road I do plan to upgrade probably a whole new machine, so that is in the works.

I mean I don't need games set to ultra to be happy, but I just would want a 700 buck monitor to be worth it.


Coming from someone that went from 1.2GB VRAM 2x570GTX then after less than a year I moved up to 2x660GTX 3GB and after playing a lot of games like battlefield 3, Batman Origins, max payne 3. I can tell you with confidence after looking at my GFX memory foot print in MSI After burner app that keeps track of VRAM usage.

an remember my 2x660GTX only has 192bit bus but I have no problem running games with 8xAA on. So the bus wont kill you by any means.

You will be fine in most games with your 2GB limit an still play at very high on the most demanding games or Ultra on PS4/Xboxone console ports under Texture settings. but you will most likely find your GPU taxed past its through put in some games.

Also you will be limited to 2xAA until you go 3GB or 4GB.

But the guys stretching how bad it will really be as you can see plenty of people are running 3 monitor NVSurround just fine at 3x1080p on one or two cards and that means your tripling your VRAM usage but people are still playing at high res with 2GB memory. An at 1440p your not even using that much resolution more like half of what 3x1080p are using.

See for yourself and 1600p is higher than yours an its just fine.
http://www.hardocp.com/article/2012/05/10/nvidia_geforc...

So go look at what games people are playing at 3x1080p and you will see you still will be in the sweet spot for another year with your card.

Hope this helps.
m
0
l
!