- May 24, 2013
- 182
- 0
- 10,710
Currently I have an i3-2120 and a GTX 650 ti Boost 2gb and I am gaming (COD, TR, Metro, etc) on a 42" HDTV at 1080p. I would very much like to upgrade my rig to a quad-core, most likely Haswell i5-4670k along with a new motherboard and then SLI by adding another GTX 650 ti Boost GPU. I may instead get a i5-3570k and still SLI since I can get one for only $170, saving $50 and likely staying on the old socket at a discount.
However this is my question...after doing this upgrade to a quad-core i5 and adding a second GPU I would love to get three new displays and play in 3D vision or whatever Nvidia calls it (not in 3d just three monitors). Here is my question. Since the GPU isn't too powerful my idea was to get three 1600x900 screens and this way I would be able to game with decent fps. My problem is most people will say go straight to 1080p for my screens. I however don't know if it will be strong enough to handle this.
So...would my gaming experience (and computer exp in general) be better with three monitors, specifically Samsung 20" with 2ms and only $100 each, or with say three 22'-24" monitors at 1080p? Resolutions of 4800x900 for three 20" monitors (2ms, 60hz) versus 5760x1080 for three 22"-24" monitors (5ms, 60hz)? Thank you all who read and reply.
PS thats a pixel matchup of 4,320,000 against 6,220,800. Roughly that is a 2:3 ratio which has to lean towards the three 20" screens right?
However this is my question...after doing this upgrade to a quad-core i5 and adding a second GPU I would love to get three new displays and play in 3D vision or whatever Nvidia calls it (not in 3d just three monitors). Here is my question. Since the GPU isn't too powerful my idea was to get three 1600x900 screens and this way I would be able to game with decent fps. My problem is most people will say go straight to 1080p for my screens. I however don't know if it will be strong enough to handle this.
So...would my gaming experience (and computer exp in general) be better with three monitors, specifically Samsung 20" with 2ms and only $100 each, or with say three 22'-24" monitors at 1080p? Resolutions of 4800x900 for three 20" monitors (2ms, 60hz) versus 5760x1080 for three 22"-24" monitors (5ms, 60hz)? Thank you all who read and reply.
PS thats a pixel matchup of 4,320,000 against 6,220,800. Roughly that is a 2:3 ratio which has to lean towards the three 20" screens right?
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram