4k gaming rig??

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Solution
atomicWAR
none of those are locked (ie vsync is not set to on). Your frame rate won't go up as your resolution does it will go down and thus the work the CPU is doing because the GPU becomes the bottleneck not the CPU as Icaraeus implied. You can even see the CPU usage drop from 1440P to 4K a full 11%. Your CPU choice will do very well with 4K. GPU wise you have the best single GPU solution on the market for 4K (not including the new titan). I run 2 GTX 1080s and still can't max everything out in every game and get 60FPS though I can in most games but I also use heavy filtering and AA. You should be able to hit your 40-50FPs easily if not using filtering an AA...however if you use them hitting your frame rate will be tougher/impossible without a...
Sort by date Sort by votes
atomicWAR

atomicWAR

Glorious
Ambassador
Sep 4, 2007
6,590
795
44,490
as long as you don't plan on maxing every setting out then you should be fine. Filtering and AA would have to be low and your graphics settings anywhere from high to ultra maybe medium on a few games. If you turn up the filtering and AA you looking at low to medium graphics settings with the occasional High. I run 4K and to max it out you really need 2 cards and even then it is not always enough.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
atomicWAR

atomicWAR

Glorious
Ambassador
Sep 4, 2007
6,590
795
44,490


Not at all. The higher the resolution the less CPU you need to crank it out. I have covered this again and again in Tom's. You use more CPU at 1080P then you do at 4K. The OPs cpu choice is very good for 4K.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
atomicWAR

atomicWAR

Glorious
Ambassador
Sep 4, 2007
6,590
795
44,490
look at these and you'll see what I mean

https://www.dropbox.com/s/pp6f8n0mlh7mufn/DS2%20deathfinitive%201280x720.JPG?dl=0 720P
https://www.dropbox.com/s/3gxg7wf7fa2m6f7/DS2%20deathfinitive%201920x1080.JPG?dl=0 1080P
https://www.dropbox.com/s/i35siaaqoq5s90l/DS2%20deathfinitive%202560x1440.JPG?dl=0 1440P
https://www.dropbox.com/s/gmqfxgrzsuf0zgr/DS2%20deathfinitive%203840x2160.JPG?dl=0 2160P

The thing to see as the resolution goes up the CPU usage goes down. All settings are the same (set fairly high) and vsync is disabled. When your resolution is set higher more load is on the GPU not the CPU. So saying his CPU is two weak for 4K is just being ill informed about how rendering works. Not meant to be rude it's just you are incorrect.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
atomicWAR

atomicWAR

Glorious
Ambassador
Sep 4, 2007
6,590
795
44,490
none of those are locked (ie vsync is not set to on). Your frame rate won't go up as your resolution does it will go down and thus the work the CPU is doing because the GPU becomes the bottleneck not the CPU as Icaraeus implied. You can even see the CPU usage drop from 1440P to 4K a full 11%. Your CPU choice will do very well with 4K. GPU wise you have the best single GPU solution on the market for 4K (not including the new titan). I run 2 GTX 1080s and still can't max everything out in every game and get 60FPS though I can in most games but I also use heavy filtering and AA. You should be able to hit your 40-50FPs easily if not using filtering an AA...however if you use them hitting your frame rate will be tougher/impossible without a second GPU.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Solution
Icaraeus

Icaraeus

Honorable
Oct 9, 2013
2,566
0
13,460


At 4K you'd still be CPU limited somewhat
 
Upvote -1 Downvote
atomicWAR

atomicWAR

Glorious
Ambassador
Sep 4, 2007
6,590
795
44,490


no you wouldn't. you have to game at 120+ fps for ryzen to be limited against an intel solution which is possible at 1080P and even 1440P. Currently 4K is 60HZ or less. So 4K a Ryzen CPU will be just as good as an intel solution (ie within 5% or less).
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Icaraeus

Icaraeus

Honorable
Oct 9, 2013
2,566
0
13,460


If it's limited by any percent, it'll be CPU limited. There is around 10-15% performance difference in 4K games between different high end CPUs.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
atomicWAR

atomicWAR

Glorious
Ambassador
Sep 4, 2007
6,590
795
44,490
Your just splitting hairs at this point. Your always limited by the CPU unless you have the best CPU made by your definition. I even said it was behind 5%...though looking further into it its actually only 2% @4K vs broadwell. And we are talking about a new chipset that is yet to be fully optimized. In six months time AMD ryzen could well be ahead but all this is besides the point. When your talking such small numbers the difference between going with Intel's equivalently priced CPU the OP is getting much more bang for the buck. More cores, threads and likely gaming longevity as games are become better threaded. BF1, Ghost Recon Wildlands, Watch Dogs 2 all use every thread you have and that's just name a few games with more launching or in devolopment as we speak.

He asked if his rig was good enough for 4K at 40-50 FPS. Clearly it is and there are multiple reviews to back this up. I am not plugging for AMD either I currently have an Intel rig. When you said his rig wasn't good enough for 4K then blaming the CPU is just simply not true. The OP deserves solid advice, based on actual gaming performance.

https://www.extremetech.com/gaming/245604-review-gtx-1080-ti-first-real-4k-gpu-drives-better-amd-intel
shows them very close at 4K

https://mygaming.co.za/news/hardware/116197-amd-ryzen-7-vs-intel-core-i7-gaming-performance-comparison.html
only hits 1440P but you can see Ryzen holds its own very well at the higher reolsuion compared to 1080P. The scores are less than the faster 1600X or 1800x (which score roughly the same so far in games) for the CPU he chose but those aren't in his budget regardless. They are enough to give him an idea where he will be though.

Point being...his CPU choice and every thing else is solid for a 4K gaming rig which was all he wanted to know.
 
Upvote 1 Downvote
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom