Need a graphics card for high quality, but low resolution

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
W

wer_dragan

Reputable
Aug 15, 2014
8
0
4,510
Hi, folks! I'm looking at updating an old computer, and I've pretty well settled on most of the components except for the graphics card. I'm planning to go with an MSI board, probably the Z97-G45, with 8-16G of RAM and a Xeon E3 1230 v3 CPU (I've heard that an overclocked i5 4670 is a better/cheaper option for a gaming computer, but since I do AV work the Xeon fits my overall needs better). The graphics card is the sticking point.

Here's my issue: I like to run games at their highest quality, but my display is a slightly older HDTV that doesn't support high resolutions. I'm looking for a card that will run current and future games at high/max settings, but only needs to be able to do so at resolutions below, say, 1440 x 900. I was considering a GTX 780, but I've heard that a card like that only matters for multiple displays and extremely high resolution. What might be a better fit for me? Would it be better to future-proof myself and get the GTX 780 even if it's overkill right now?

Thanks so much for your time!
 
Solution
MeteorsRaining
Yes a GTX 780 or R9 290 is a very good option. But considering your display is not 4k level, and you don't have multiple displays, it'll be unnecessary, it'll be like 80+ FPS on FHD which is not really seen different from 60-70 FPS until you get 4k or multiple displays. So I'd not recommend a GTX 780 or R9 290 here.

A R9 280X for $300-330 is a very much viable option, so is the GTX 770 for $10-20 more. But I'd rather go with R9 280X as its more value for money and will get 50+ FPS on Ultra settings on any latest title. You love quality over resolution, so a 280X can secure high-ultra gaming with 50+ FPS on almost any title for 2-4 years on FHD or lower resolution.
If you're a FPS-buff, get the R9 290 and you'll be like 70+ FPS on any...
Sort by date Sort by votes
MeteorsRaining

MeteorsRaining

Champion
Jul 27, 2014
8,346
3
50,565
Yes a GTX 780 or R9 290 is a very good option. But considering your display is not 4k level, and you don't have multiple displays, it'll be unnecessary, it'll be like 80+ FPS on FHD which is not really seen different from 60-70 FPS until you get 4k or multiple displays. So I'd not recommend a GTX 780 or R9 290 here.

A R9 280X for $300-330 is a very much viable option, so is the GTX 770 for $10-20 more. But I'd rather go with R9 280X as its more value for money and will get 50+ FPS on Ultra settings on any latest title. You love quality over resolution, so a 280X can secure high-ultra gaming with 50+ FPS on almost any title for 2-4 years on FHD or lower resolution.
If you're a FPS-buff, get the R9 290 and you'll be like 70+ FPS on any latest title on Ultra on FHD. I'd still not recommend a GTX 780 or R9 290X as 5-10FPS on Ultra on FHD is not worth the extra $50-100 IMO.

Conclusion: R9 280X for any latest title right not and for a couple of years on Ultra @ 50+ FPS.
OR
R9 290 for any latest title for 4+ years on Ultra with 50+ FPS.
Whichever is more budget friendly.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Solution
Scampi

Scampi

Reputable
May 26, 2014
666
0
5,660
For such a low resolution, you may as well get a bang for buck R9 270X.

Enjoy it, and replace it when you like with no remorse of how much it cost.

If you think you may upgrade your display in the near future, then sure, go with a GTX 780 or R9 290.

 
Upvote 0 Downvote
T

techtej

Reputable
Sep 4, 2014
18
0
4,510
Get a GTX 660 it is enough for that resolution and maybe a slight overkill right now...but high end games are getting released much quicker right now....so get a GTX 660 and it can play easily on ultra setting with 35fps on average and a i5 3450 processor is enough for a GTX 660 card so.... get a GTX 660 and a i5 3450 and save your bucks
 
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