Should I upgrade to the GTX 1080 for 4K?

sgs83

Honorable
Sep 5, 2012
24
0
10,510
I currently have the following setup:

• R9 290 (manually overclocked)
• i7-2600 CPU (non-K)
• 16 GB RAM

1080p gaming on the system is still very solid, and it looks like I’ll be good to go for at least another year (if not longer) if I’m willing to stay at 1080p and make a few minor compromises to detail settings.

I mostly play cinematic single player stuff and, within reason, will sacrifice framerate a bit for visuals. Given my tastes, I am super-excited about several games that are supposed to drop within the next 8 months or so - Deus Ex: Mankind Divided, Dishonored 2, Mass Effect Andromeda, Watch Dogs 2 (first one is very underrated IMO), Mafia 3, Prey, etc.

It sounds like a GTX 1080 would likely give me Ultra-ish settings at playable (40-60ish) framerates for these games. A local retailer actually has the GTX 1080 Strix for $650, so I have the option of buying the card for its going rate instead of an inflated online price.

Given the benchmarks, it also sounds like the card will have a relatively short life span (probably two years or less) for 4K gaming, and I get that even then I will not get consistent 60 FPS/Ultra performance at 4K. That Is a bit nuts for a $650 investment. But in real terms, it almost seems worth it to be able to play these games at 4K now.

I would also need to get a 4K display. I currently play on a 40” 1080P TV and want to stay with a larger display. I am thinking about the Vizio D40u-D1 (http://www.rtings.com/tv/reviews/vizio/d-series-4k-2016).

I’d be more comfortable doing this if I could downscale to 1440P if a game becomes too demanding at 4K. However, it sounds like downscaling to 1440P doesn’t work very well on 4K displays since the pixel ratios aren’t multiples of each other.

A few questions –

• MOST IMPORTANT QUESTION - I have been told that a 4:4:4 4K display should scale properly to 1440p. From what I have seen, the person who told me this is wrong. Is there a clear answer to that question? The Vizio I’m looking at is not 4:4:4, but it sounds like the lack of 4:4:4 is not the end of the world for gaming. Also, more importantly, are there any 4K displays that scale down well to 1440p?
• Any alternate suggestions for a 4K display in the 40” range under $500?
• Does anyone have direct experience playing 4K on a GTX 1080 and have comments on what it’s like?
• Does my read of this situation basically appear to be accurate? Anything here I’m not taking into account?
• In general, for those of you who have upgraded to 4K-capable systems, was it worth it?

Thanks.
 
Solution

You can rely on the display/monitor/TV upscaling or use the GPU's own upscaling. Using GPU upscaling will work with any display since the GPU will be outputing already upscaled 4k video to the port. The question is whether or not you will be happy with the upscaled picture in either of those ways..

InvalidError

Titan
Moderator
If you are contemplating a buy for games that are tabled for some point next year, the rational thing to do would be to delay the purchase until the games you want to upgrade for actually come out or about to come out. By then, all GPU prices should have settled down. AMD's Vega should also have come out by then, which will hopefully shake down Nvidia's pricing a bit.
 

sgs83

Honorable
Sep 5, 2012
24
0
10,510
Thanks for your thoughts. Actually, though, I want it for a game that's out next week (Deus Ex, which is my most anticipated game of anything on the list). Also, Dishonored, Mafia 3, etc. will be out before the end of the year, and I don't anticipate any major shakeups before then. However, the games I'm looking forward to extend into next year (particularly Mass Effect).
 

InvalidError

Titan
Moderator
You always have the option of trying Deus Ex with the 290 first and pulling the trigger on the GTX1080 at the next opportunity if the 290 fails to get you a gameplay experience you can be happy with.

As more high-end gamers get done buying their GTX1080s, opportunities to get one closer to the MSRP should only become increasingly common.
 

Vogner16

Honorable
Jan 27, 2014
598
1
11,160
major shake up on black Friday always got good sales out.

in my opinion, I would not go for a 1080. heres why.

1. Price is $650. that's the cost of 10 AAA title games
2. you already have near perfect 1080p gaming system. 290 overclocked is a hell of a good system. maybe try unlocking cores?
3. this card like you said is expected to have a short life. with early signs of poor next gen API performance its expected to be surpassed and forgotten by next gen cards.
4. you can always downscale a 4K tv to 1080p. all 4k TV manufactures know that currently nobody is getting 4K content. in order to sell 4K TV's they HAVE to be able to scale to the common "HD" spec that consoles, satellite, cable, and other inputs run at. playing at 1080p on a 4K tv will often turn on that TV's auto sharpening feature that upscales 1080p content to 4K... Long story short your system can play just fine.
5. I have a bias toward NVidia over the years as I have seen their products to have far to short of lives via driver gimps and vram limitations per power of card as well as poor sli scaling that I'm Leary to purchase from them. They make good short term investments but not if you plan on keeping the card for more than 2 years. otherwise you were better off buying AMD
 

snostorm100

Honorable
Mar 24, 2016
36
3
10,545
While currently the champ the 1080 is not the 4k solution we all need. Its capable but unless you can do it right with no compromises why bother IMO. Im gonna hold on to my 970k and stick with 1080p until I can play 4k with everything cranked. Just my opinion tho.
 

Vogner16

Honorable
Jan 27, 2014
598
1
11,160


I 100% agree with this.
 

sgs83

Honorable
Sep 5, 2012
24
0
10,510
Thanks for the thoughts, guys. And yeah, I have a perfectly good 1080p system now. On many levels, upgrading would be pretty decadent and not very economical given where card prices are likely to be in the next year or so.

It would be more about paying a premium to be able to play some highly anticipated games in 4K now; I'm still mulling it over but I see where, in pure monetary terms, it's not the wisest call.

If possible, I'd still like some clarity on the 1440p scaling issue - I understand that 4K scales down well to 1080p because the dimensions are multiples of each other. In my current circumstances, that's not too exciting a prospect since I'm basically getting the full 1080p experience now.

However, being able to scale down to 1440p if 4K gets too demanding would be a compelling factor in this decision. However, it sounds like 4K-1440p scaling doesn't really work since the dimensions aren't parallel.

Are there any exceptions to this, any displays that allow for 4K-1440p scaling? Does a display being 4:4:4 play a factor in how well 4K-1440p scaling works? This would be good information to have whether or not I decide to pull the trigger on the upgrade.
 

InvalidError

Titan
Moderator
Going from a 1440p source to a 4k native resolution is called upscaling.

Even the best scalers can only make educated guesses about the relationship between pixels when they interpolate details to fill gaps between pixels and blend neighboring pixel values from the original image to produce the scaled native pixels. You will have that issues whenever non-integer-multiple resolutions are involved, there is no magical cure for this. You will have to either upscale 1080p or reduce details to play at 4k native if you want to eliminate the possibility of scaling artifacts.
 

sgs83

Honorable
Sep 5, 2012
24
0
10,510
OK, thanks for clarifying. Sounds like there's no surefire way to effectively do 1440p on a 4K display.



 

InvalidError

Titan
Moderator

You can rely on the display/monitor/TV upscaling or use the GPU's own upscaling. Using GPU upscaling will work with any display since the GPU will be outputing already upscaled 4k video to the port. The question is whether or not you will be happy with the upscaled picture in either of those ways..
 
Solution

sgs83

Honorable
Sep 5, 2012
24
0
10,510
I'm mulling over going ahead and buying the 4K TV (the 40" Vizio D series seems like the best option at my desired price range) but holding off on the graphics card for now. I'll eventually want a 4K TV anyway, and I would be able to test out 1440p scaling, older games at 4K, and newer games at 4K to see how they look (even if the newer ones won't be playable).

That way I can sort of preview what the GTX 1080 would be like, and get a sense of whether the immediate gratification of playing a series of highly anticipated games at 4K at release would be worth the premium.

Again, the feedback is appreciated.



 

InvalidError

Titan
Moderator

You can make 4k playable on something less powerful than a 290. The main limit is how much you are willing to compromise on details.
 

sgs83

Honorable
Sep 5, 2012
24
0
10,510
I posted the below answer in response to a follow up question in this related thread - http://www.tomshardware.com/forum/id-3157378/vizio-d40u-good-gaming.html - and I figured I'd share it here as well since it's relevant -

***

Thanks for asking, cause I would have appreciated a follow up to a thread like this while I was exploring the TV/video card purchases. About a week and a half ago, I splurged and got the 40" Vizio and the GTX 1080 FTW Edition (they were out of Strixes but fortunately had one last FTW).

The TV looks great and I've been happy with the response time. I don't have a frame of reference to know how well it compares with other 4K tvs and monitors, but the picture is very good and I haven't been disappointed in 4K. If some games have looked better than others, my sense has been that it's due to limitations of the games themselves or the 1080, as opposed to the display being deficient, as the best stuff looks remarkable indeed.

As for 4K, while not totally transformative, it makes a big difference, albeit in some games more than others. One of the coolest things is that it lends this 3D-ish quality to the imagery that makes the various levels of distance in front of you seem much more defined. Once the shooting begins in The Division, for example, explosions and particle effects seem to pop out in front of the enemies, and when you aim at them, they seem to stand out in a physical space that recedes behind them in a way that makes 1080p seem comparatively paper-flat.

In general, 4K adds a real sense of density and presence to the environment that is quite cool. Things also look a lot smoother and less pixel-ey and shinier. It's like a filter being taken off. I was having a hard time engaging with Assassin's Creed Syndicate, for example, but its version of London in 4K is astonishing, particularly in daylight, and I've spent a lot of time with the game mostly to take in the sights. From what I've seen, visually lavish environments (Syndicate, Bioshock Infinite even though it's older, Doom to an extent) particularly benefit from the extra resolution and density.

The big thing I was looking forward to was playing Deus Ex: Mankind Divided in 4K, and I’ve been satisfied. Despite all of the garment-rending over the game's optimization, I'm able to play at the High preset with a couple of effects turned off at around 30-40 fps (judging by benchmarks; in practice, it feels closer to 40).
I expect performance to improve with patches down the line, but as is I’m OK with it. I find the game totally playable and satisfying, and I could tell a big difference visually when I switched to 1080p as an experiment.

In general, with the 1080, I am getting about the level of performance I was expecting. I can turn settings up to reasonably high levels and get reasonable framerates. It's not a 4K Ultra/60fps killer, but I wasn't expecting that.

While 4K is cool, and I am happy with my decision on both the TV and the video card, it isn't necessarily the best call for most people. I was -

a. itching to get a new toy;
b. facing a bunch of highly anticipated games coming out in the next few months;
c. fortunate enough to have enough disposable income to make the purchases; and
d. wanting, almost for the heck of it, to see the upper levels of what PC graphics can be these days.

For me under these circumstances, upgrading to 4K was worth it. However, I can see where this card will likely be underpowered for 4K in a couple of years or less. And cool as it is, 4K doesn't change what the games fundamentally are. You get the core, important experience at 1080p.

If you're on a tight entertainment budget, making the leap now probably isn't the thing to do. But if you understand what you're getting into and recognize that you'll be paying a fairly severe premium to get 4K today, I can say that it's worth exploring, and I'm glad I did it.