G-Sync vs 144Hz vs 2K vs 4K for new monitor

[SevynDaze]

Hello all. I'm an avid PC gamer that is about to build a new rig, most likely around the core i7-6700k/GTX1070, unless I can wait until the inevitable release of the GTX1080Ti. Eventually, though not immediately, I'm going to want to invest in a new monitor. I'm currently playing on an Acer 27" 1080p 60Hz monitor, which was a fabulous upgrade from my old LG Flatron 22". There are so many new technologies flying about that I'm not sure what is worth the extra coin and what is not.

I'm wanting to upgrade to at least 1440p, but preferably 4k if the system can handle it at or close to 60fps. Also looking to move to a 32" display, or at least one larger than my current one. So what should I go with? I'm not necessarily looking for a specific monitor, just informed opinions about what I should get. Is 1440p with Gsync worth the extra money? 4k? Is it even possible without some crazy SLI rig to get 60 fps at 4k, at which point 144hz would be all but useless though g-sync might make a notable difference? Any input regarding monitor selection (or even alternative build plans) is welcome and appreciated. Thank you!

 

[ajpaolello]

I'd only advise 4k to 1080 and above. 1070 SLI maybe depending on how well the game scales. Gsync's value to me is kind of meh. I appreciate what it does, but many monitors are ridiculously priced for the rather small and sometimes not even noticeable difference. 60 fps would need at the minmum 2 1080s I think. 2 Ttian XP could make it happen, but that's a lot of cash.

 

[sshortguy1]

for 4k resolution @ 60 HZ is now but maybe in 5 years from now , I ended up buying 2 gtx 1070s for SLI and took back my gtx 1080 for getting a higher frames is to SLI them not a single card is capable of getting 144 fps on 4k from my experience with other monitors and video cards there's not a single card to get 144 fps on new games but on older games you will get around 100 fps + but as of right now my gtx 1070s can get around 100-125 fps on gta 5 and others but I haven't noticed as of any tearing as of yet , and for the new titans they are not made for gaming like in the last yr's titans , the titans are made for multi tasking and photo editing etc , not for gaming and done reading about how fast the card can produce is MHz the gtx 1080 has em around 1600 -1841 MHz and the gtx 1070s are around 1500 - 1750 MHz the new titans are down around 1400 MHz , you think that it has 12 gigs of vram and it can run it but in reality you have to have both the MHz and the vram otherwise it will run slower than you expect

 

[sshortguy1]

I ended up getting 2 gtx 1070s and a hb bridge the new bridges otherwise you'll get a slower MHz transfer between the cards the old bridges can can transfer up to 400 MHz the new hb bridges transfers up to 650 MHz as of right now I can get over 100 fps on my 4k monitor but in some games they are capped from tearing like in sleeping dogs and tomb raider rise of the tomb raider where I can get 144 fps with 1080p but in 4k , it goes down to around 60-75 fps
like the tersla video cards they are capable of having 24 gigs of vram but like the video on youtube done a benchmark using the tesla card and was disappointed in how low the fps was and it states that it's not a gaming card but like others they'll try but like a lot of situations it fails

 

[J_E_D_70]

If you're not wanting to SLI think I'd stop at 1440p. I do recommend 144hz and gsync - been really happy with them. Normally stay north of 100fps in bf1 beta. Withcher 3 was capped at 60 and stayed pretty close to it.

 

[sshortguy1]

jed I used to game on a 1440p but went to 4k b/c it's clearer and the colors are more accurate , but gave up on 1440p monitors b/c of back light bleeds and dead pixels I haven't had any dead pixels on 1440p monitors but a lot has in the review section , but seen a lot of back light bleeds on a lot of 1440 p monitors , some were so bad that on the edges there was a 1/8 inch light on both sides , a lot of old games it's pretty easy to get them to run over 100 fps but i'm sure he wants to play the new games over 100 fps and the gtx 1080 isn't cutting it the gtx 1080 was only getting 50s-80s on gta 5 and rise of the tomb raider , I heard a lot saying situations about micro stutter etc but if they knew how to connect them right , you wouldn't have any issues but some games are capped to a limit of frames call of Juarez games is 1 sleeping dogs ,watchdogs, wolfenstein is just a few I've mentioned , I done SLI with a lot of cards in the past from gtx 560 - gtx 1080s , but to SLI for the justice out of them is going with the gtx 1070s you'll get better permance than with the gtx 1080s , just like the new titans I've seen in the past 3-4 way sli is pretty lame outcome in the frame rates with the fps ratio around 60s to 70s on 3 way SLI with the new titan x
if you've read the articles concerning the new pascal cards NVidia haven't and won't support 3-4 way SLI , will only support 2 cards in SLI
for those who don't believe me there's an article concerning 3-4 way SLI

For the kind of gamer who has way too much money – or the enthusiast overclocking, must-have-the-biggest-ePeen sort, multi GPU setups have been the way to go. NVidia’s SLI allows for multi GPU setups of up to 4 cards. That’s changing. It looks like Nvidia is dropping support for 3 and 4-way SLI to focus on dual GPU configurations.
ONLY 2 WAY SLI ,but known in the past going 3-4 way SLI only develops problems

 

[_MOJO_]

I say with your intended build, and the possibility of getting an additional 1070 for SLI - 1440 p is the sweet spot (especially for the 1070) to get excellent frame rates in AAA titles, even higher frame rates if you choose to go with a 144 hz monitor and possibly tweak settings. Q1 of 2017 promises a 3440x1440 144 hz monitor from LG (if you want to wait and save a little longer).

http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/news_archive/35.htm#lg.display_144hz

I have an ROG Swift PG279Q. I must have won the silicone lottery. I have run it constantly at 165 hz while gaming for over a year now and all of that with Gsync , high refresh rate and IPS color accuracy. I have a multiple monitor setup as an illustrator/graphic designer and avid gamer like yourself. I have several monitor arms for changing monitor configs (especially changing between gaming at leisure and completing projects on my drawing tablet workstation for whatever my projects demand.) This is my setup:

I rotate the ROG SWIFT vertically to the left when working with multiple images, windows, folders etc for illustration/graphic design/ maybe watching videos while I work.

When its time to have a serious gaming session, I push my tablet backwards then I rotate the ROG Swift back to horizontal and use either the 3440x1440 Ultrawide on top or the 2560x1080 Ultrawide to the right for Teamspeak, or I just deactivate them all together. Then my setup looks something like this:

They are all monitors I have purchased sequentially (and cannot seem to part with) . I have gamed on every one of them -some months at a time only to want something different, or better. I have pros/cons for each one- but the ROG Swift with gsync and 165 hz refresh rate is unequivocally my weapon of choice. In my opinion, only a 3440x1440 144 hz monitor would realistically be my next purchase.(I do enjoy Ultrawide gaming).

I do have the Titan Pascal pushing it- so there's that. I had a gtx 980 and it did just fine at 2560x1440 - I can only surmise that the 1070 is even better.

Gsync DOES make a difference in fast paced FPS, Flight sim, Action games. High refresh rates DO make a difference. IPS DOES make a difference.

Backlight bleed is irrelevant to me because I only notice it on the fleeting moments my monitor is completely black- like post or restarts.

Dead pixels are a problem that was rectified after a bad batch of monitors. I have not experienced this personally with mine. The high refresh rate renders moving objects with picture perfectclarity at high speed with no ghosting or motion blur. The only way I can describe it is to play the same game on each of your monitors; your current 60 hz side by side if you decide to get a gsync/144 hz monitor. I did. I have played multiple monitors side by side at different aspect ratios over numerous titles. The difference is staggering and highly noticeable regardless of what others may or may not comment. You simply have to witness it yourself. Only other owners of the gaming monitors will agree with me. Avid gamers do not typically revert back to 60 hz- because the difference is simply that much better and noticeable. Believe the hype.

4K is not quite there yet. You get more pixel density ( substantially more taxing on even current GPUS than 1440p ) but fps has much higher diminishing returns at 4K with the current GPUs on the market. A 1080 or Titan Pascal will push 60 fps on 4K - but at a hefty price/performance % increase. Stable frame rates over 60 fps in 4K are a ways away for even enthusiast gaming build budgets.

Bottom line: I think for your build with a 1070, the returns on a 1440 p high refresh rate monitor with gsync are totally worth it - if you have the money.

 

[sshortguy1]

well I done the benchmarks on the 4k with the 2 gtx 1070s getting 60 fps on aaa games is real easy and maxing out the games in 4k , if I try to push them to 144 hz to 150 fps I have to do is turn the settings down a bit well from your pictures of 4 1440 p monitors = out to 8k resolution and to think the pascal titan is going to run it ? it might for some time but will eventually get stressed and overheat b/c of the draw of lack of power and 1 titan x don't have enough vram to push that kind of resolution,,,,that's why others sli to get the extra power to run multi monitors especially for gaming

 

[_MOJO_]

Im not sure you understand my setup. These are four different sized monitors.I do not game on all four at the same time- only the ROG Swift. Your 1070s with settings turned down will push 144 hz. My Titan Pascal will push 165 HZ on Ultra (sometimes constant) at 1440p. The PascalTitan gets hot for it's famed throttling issues- but I plan on buying a water block soon.

You cannot possibly think I would game on this oddly configured mutli-monitor setup? My contribution to this thread was to share "Any input regarding monitor selection (or even alternative build plans) is welcome and appreciated."

When seeking out my monitors, other's input was valuable for me, especially when it was with merit and experienced knowledge. I have a wide range of monitors and I have benchmarked them all intensively side by side at different resolutions focusing on the advantages/disadvantages of gsync/high refresh rates vs. 60hz with noticeable input lag.

Again, Bottom line: I think for your build with a 1070 (or two), the returns on a 1440 p high refresh rate monitor with gsync are totally worth it - if you have the money.

 

[sshortguy1]

if you're using just 1 for gaming you'll be fine sorry for the misunderstanding , yea I can say so but for the cost and the performance doesn't add up I haven't had any screen tearing as of yet but honestly thinking of going with a 144 hz monitor if I do run into it , I seen a monitor I was interested in called a pg27AQ which is 900 dollars 450 dollars more than what I just bought and technically it has the same features as the pg278aq model but a lot cheaper price , just like I bought the gtx 1080 lacked the power what I was used to using 2 gtx 970s in SLI

 

[sshortguy1]

Im not sure you understand my setup. These are four different sized monitors.I do not game on all four at the same time- only the ROG Swift. Your 1070s with settings turned down will push 144 hz. My Titan Pascal will push 165 HZ on Ultra (sometimes constant) at 1440p. The PascalTitan gets hot for it's famed throttling issues- but I plan on buying a water block soon.

You cannot possibly think I would game on this oddly configured mutli-monitor setup? My contribution to this thread was to share "Any input regarding monitor selection (or even alternative build plans) is welcome and appreciated."

When seeking out my monitors, other's input was valuable for me, especially when it was with merit and experienced knowledge. I have a wide range of monitors and I have benchmarked them all intensively side by side at different resolutions focusing on the advantages/disadvantages of gsync/high refresh rates vs. 60hz with noticeable input lag.

Again, Bottom line: I think for your build with a 1070 (or two), the returns on a 1440 p high refresh rate monitor with gsync are totally worth it - if you have the money.

I've tried using 1440p 144 hz monitors in the past especially with the acer and asus pg278q and the pg279q and they were terrible for back light bleeds 1 had 1 so bad that it shown on the edges of the desktop screen to get rid of the back light bleeds is either go with 1080 p monitors or 4k I haven't had issues with that on either monitors

 

[_MOJO_]

Im not sure you understand my setup. These are four different sized monitors.I do not game on all four at the same time- only the ROG Swift. Your 1070s with settings turned down will push 144 hz. My Titan Pascal will push 165 HZ on Ultra (sometimes constant) at 1440p. The PascalTitan gets hot for it's famed throttling issues- but I plan on buying a water block soon.

You cannot possibly think I would game on this oddly configured mutli-monitor setup? My contribution to this thread was to share "Any input regarding monitor selection (or even alternative build plans) is welcome and appreciated."

When seeking out my monitors, other's input was valuable for me, especially when it was with merit and experienced knowledge. I have a wide range of monitors and I have benchmarked them all intensively side by side at different resolutions focusing on the advantages/disadvantages of gsync/high refresh rates vs. 60hz with noticeable input lag.

Again, Bottom line: I think for your build with a 1070 (or two), the returns on a 1440 p high refresh rate monitor with gsync are totally worth it - if you have the money.

I've tried using 1440p 144 hz monitors in the past especially with the acer and asus pg278q and the pg279q and they were terrible for back light bleeds 1 had 1 so bad that it shown on the edges of the desktop screen to get rid of the back light bleeds is either go with 1080 p monitors or 4k I haven't had issues with that on either monitors

Backlight bleed is such a non-point in my opinion. I am a graphic designer and digital illustrator. I have worked in gaming studios for years now. Anyone who has ever done digital photography, video editing, graphic design on a PC or MAC knows that the IPS monitor is the best monitor for accurately displaying colors to almost 100% color accuracy in the RGB spectrum. IPS monitors have always been more expensive and desired for this reason - beautiful, accurate color. Every IPS monitor owner knows about "IPS glow" or "backlight bleed" as you refer to it. It occurs any time the monitor is completely black, like when your PC is posting, or timing out - not during a dark game like Batman Arkham Knight or gaming in dark environments. I have never, ever experienced backlight bleed during a gaming session- just beautiful colors. Some individuals just cant deal with it in the brief seconds they are looking at a black screen. When do you ever just look at a black screen? Personally- never, because I am either working or gaming.

1080p and 4K also have IPS or "in plane switching" panels. I am surprised that you have only experienced backlight bleed on 1440p gaming monitors..... If you do not have backlight bleed, it is either because you have a TN or VA panel - both of which are less desirable in the context of accurate colors. TN panels color looks "washed out" even with 144 hz . VA panels are slightly better, but there are issues with those as well. Gaming monitor manufacturers listened to the community wanting more accurate, vibrant colors- and started implementing IPS panels (which used to be impossibly expensive and technology had not caught up to the high refresh rates).

Gamers wanted more vibrant color, high refresh rates, no screen tearing and larger resolutions - and that is exactly what they got with 1440p overclockable IPS gaming monitors. Yet some complain about "backlight bleed". It is like complaining about whether the back of the panel has a glossy or matte finish- once you start utilizing the monitor for work or gaming- you simply will not notice or care.

For 1080p you do not even need a 10 series card- most 970s and 980 will push anything you can throw at them even at 144hz. 4K is even more pixels and way more taxing on your system. Lowering settings on 4K for 60hz and 60 fps max for a slightly higher pixel density would not be my choice when I could play on Ultra at 1440p at up to 144 hz/165hz 144 fps/165 fps .

 

[sshortguy1]

Im not sure you understand my setup. These are four different sized monitors.I do not game on all four at the same time- only the ROG Swift. Your 1070s with settings turned down will push 144 hz. My Titan Pascal will push 165 HZ on Ultra (sometimes constant) at 1440p. The PascalTitan gets hot for it's famed throttling issues- but I plan on buying a water block soon.

You cannot possibly think I would game on this oddly configured mutli-monitor setup? My contribution to this thread was to share "Any input regarding monitor selection (or even alternative build plans) is welcome and appreciated."

When seeking out my monitors, other's input was valuable for me, especially when it was with merit and experienced knowledge. I have a wide range of monitors and I have benchmarked them all intensively side by side at different resolutions focusing on the advantages/disadvantages of gsync/high refresh rates vs. 60hz with noticeable input lag.

Again, Bottom line: I think for your build with a 1070 (or two), the returns on a 1440 p high refresh rate monitor with gsync are totally worth it - if you have the money.

I've tried using 1440p 144 hz monitors in the past especially with the acer and asus pg278q and the pg279q and they were terrible for back light bleeds 1 had 1 so bad that it shown on the edges of the desktop screen to get rid of the back light bleeds is either go with 1080 p monitors or 4k I haven't had issues with that on either monitors

Backlight bleed is such a non-point in my opinion. I am a graphic designer and digital illustrator. I have worked in gaming studios for years now. Anyone who has ever done digital photography, video editing, graphic design on a PC or MAC knows that the IPS monitor is the best monitor for accurately displaying colors to almost 100% color accuracy in the RGB spectrum. IPS monitors have always been more expensive and desired for this reason - beautiful, accurate color. Every IPS monitor owner knows about "IPS glow" or "backlight bleed" as you refer to it. It occurs any time the monitor is completely black, like when your PC is posting, or timing out - not during a dark game like Batman Arkham Knight or gaming in dark environments. I have never, ever experienced backlight bleed during a gaming session- just beautiful colors. Some individuals just cant deal with it in the brief seconds they are looking at a black screen. When do you ever just look at a black screen? Personally- never, because I am either working or gaming.

1080p and 4K also have IPS or "in plane switching" panels. I am surprised that you have only experienced backlight bleed on 1440p gaming monitors..... If you do not have backlight bleed, it is either because you have a TN or VA panel - both of which are less desirable in the context of accurate colors. TN panels color looks "washed out" even with 144 hz . VA panels are slightly better, but there are issues with those as well. Gaming monitor manufacturers listened to the community wanting more accurate, vibrant colors- and started implementing IPS panels (which used to be impossibly expensive and technology had not caught up to the high refresh rates).

Gamers wanted more vibrant color, high refresh rates, no screen tearing and larger resolutions - and that is exactly what they got with 1440p overclockable IPS gaming monitors. Yet some complain about "backlight bleed". It is like complaining about whether the back of the panel has a glossy or matte finish- once you start utilizing the monitor for work or gaming- you simply will not notice or care.

For 1080p you do not even need a 10 series card- most 970s and 980 will push anything you can throw at them even at 144hz. 4K is even more pixels and way more taxing on your system. Lowering settings on 4K for 60hz and 60 fps max for a slightly higher pixel density would not be my choice when I could play on Ultra at 1440p at up to 144 hz/165hz 144 fps/165 fps .

really the 10 series as u just mentioned , the gtx 1080 only can produce up to upper 40s- 50s fps in 4k lowering the settings will increase the frame rates but I own 2 gtx 1070s with a pb287 model 4k monitor and getting over a 100 fps on newer games like gta 5 and rise of the tomb raider and older games over 140 fps without a notice of screen tearing that is what you're going to worry about but with this model I haven't noticed it and it's clearer and the colors are pretty much accurate

 

[_MOJO_]

Im not sure you understand my setup. These are four different sized monitors.I do not game on all four at the same time- only the ROG Swift. Your 1070s with settings turned down will push 144 hz. My Titan Pascal will push 165 HZ on Ultra (sometimes constant) at 1440p. The PascalTitan gets hot for it's famed throttling issues- but I plan on buying a water block soon.

You cannot possibly think I would game on this oddly configured mutli-monitor setup? My contribution to this thread was to share "Any input regarding monitor selection (or even alternative build plans) is welcome and appreciated."

When seeking out my monitors, other's input was valuable for me, especially when it was with merit and experienced knowledge. I have a wide range of monitors and I have benchmarked them all intensively side by side at different resolutions focusing on the advantages/disadvantages of gsync/high refresh rates vs. 60hz with noticeable input lag.

Again, Bottom line: I think for your build with a 1070 (or two), the returns on a 1440 p high refresh rate monitor with gsync are totally worth it - if you have the money.

I've tried using 1440p 144 hz monitors in the past especially with the acer and asus pg278q and the pg279q and they were terrible for back light bleeds 1 had 1 so bad that it shown on the edges of the desktop screen to get rid of the back light bleeds is either go with 1080 p monitors or 4k I haven't had issues with that on either monitors

Backlight bleed is such a non-point in my opinion. I am a graphic designer and digital illustrator. I have worked in gaming studios for years now. Anyone who has ever done digital photography, video editing, graphic design on a PC or MAC knows that the IPS monitor is the best monitor for accurately displaying colors to almost 100% color accuracy in the RGB spectrum. IPS monitors have always been more expensive and desired for this reason - beautiful, accurate color. Every IPS monitor owner knows about "IPS glow" or "backlight bleed" as you refer to it. It occurs any time the monitor is completely black, like when your PC is posting, or timing out - not during a dark game like Batman Arkham Knight or gaming in dark environments. I have never, ever experienced backlight bleed during a gaming session- just beautiful colors. Some individuals just cant deal with it in the brief seconds they are looking at a black screen. When do you ever just look at a black screen? Personally- never, because I am either working or gaming.

1080p and 4K also have IPS or "in plane switching" panels. I am surprised that you have only experienced backlight bleed on 1440p gaming monitors..... If you do not have backlight bleed, it is either because you have a TN or VA panel - both of which are less desirable in the context of accurate colors. TN panels color looks "washed out" even with 144 hz . VA panels are slightly better, but there are issues with those as well. Gaming monitor manufacturers listened to the community wanting more accurate, vibrant colors- and started implementing IPS panels (which used to be impossibly expensive and technology had not caught up to the high refresh rates).

Gamers wanted more vibrant color, high refresh rates, no screen tearing and larger resolutions - and that is exactly what they got with 1440p overclockable IPS gaming monitors. Yet some complain about "backlight bleed". It is like complaining about whether the back of the panel has a glossy or matte finish- once you start utilizing the monitor for work or gaming- you simply will not notice or care.

For 1080p you do not even need a 10 series card- most 970s and 980 will push anything you can throw at them even at 144hz. 4K is even more pixels and way more taxing on your system. Lowering settings on 4K for 60hz and 60 fps max for a slightly higher pixel density would not be my choice when I could play on Ultra at 1440p at up to 144 hz/165hz 144 fps/165 fps .

really the 10 series as u just mentioned , the gtx 1080 only can produce up to upper 40s- 50s fps in 4k lowering the settings will increase the frame rates but I own 2 gtx 1070s with a pb287 model 4k monitor and getting over a 100 fps on newer games like gta 5 and rise of the tomb raider and older games over 140 fps without a notice of screen tearing that is what you're going to worry about but with this model I haven't noticed it and it's clearer and the colors are pretty much accurate

*throws hands up* Lowering settings at 4K to get high frame rates is defintely a tradeoff- especially when you are only able to visualize 60 fps (since 60 hz seems to be the highest threshold currently)

IMHO this is your contemplated choices as initially stated 1440p of 4K, correct? sshortguy seems to be locked into 4K. I am of the opinion that 1440p is the most beneficial with your existing components. You can definitely push high fps at decent to ultra settings with your single 1070 (which is touted as the ideal 1440p card). If you decided to buy an additional 1070, I have seen some videos online that seem to suggest 1070 SLI is a good config. I had 6 series cards back in the day and dealt with some micro-stutter issues with my SLI config. Perhaps that is not as common. I prefer a single card solution- thats just me.

27" 4K monitors are more affordable than the Gsync high refresh rate gaming monitors - but you only get 60 fps for a little more screen real estate. You cannot enjoy ultra settings because you have to turn your settings down. This is a clear indicator that the 1070 is not ideal with 4K. In terms of gaming, at 4K you get better visuals (but have to turn settings down for performance and your 1070 will struggle a bit). Why compromise?

1440p with gsync and high refresh rates will cost you a bit more, but yields a lot of performance and immersive features with 144 hz and gsync technology. . At 1440 p, you get stunning visuals and high performance with the gsync and high refresh rates while utilizing your card to its fullest potential. The 1070 is a beautiful match for a 1440p gaming monitor. Beautiful visuals and high performance with little or no compromise.

 

[sshortguy1]

Im not sure you understand my setup. These are four different sized monitors.I do not game on all four at the same time- only the ROG Swift. Your 1070s with settings turned down will push 144 hz. My Titan Pascal will push 165 HZ on Ultra (sometimes constant) at 1440p. The PascalTitan gets hot for it's famed throttling issues- but I plan on buying a water block soon.

You cannot possibly think I would game on this oddly configured mutli-monitor setup? My contribution to this thread was to share "Any input regarding monitor selection (or even alternative build plans) is welcome and appreciated."

When seeking out my monitors, other's input was valuable for me, especially when it was with merit and experienced knowledge. I have a wide range of monitors and I have benchmarked them all intensively side by side at different resolutions focusing on the advantages/disadvantages of gsync/high refresh rates vs. 60hz with noticeable input lag.

Again, Bottom line: I think for your build with a 1070 (or two), the returns on a 1440 p high refresh rate monitor with gsync are totally worth it - if you have the money.

I've tried using 1440p 144 hz monitors in the past especially with the acer and asus pg278q and the pg279q and they were terrible for back light bleeds 1 had 1 so bad that it shown on the edges of the desktop screen to get rid of the back light bleeds is either go with 1080 p monitors or 4k I haven't had issues with that on either monitors

Backlight bleed is such a non-point in my opinion. I am a graphic designer and digital illustrator. I have worked in gaming studios for years now. Anyone who has ever done digital photography, video editing, graphic design on a PC or MAC knows that the IPS monitor is the best monitor for accurately displaying colors to almost 100% color accuracy in the RGB spectrum. IPS monitors have always been more expensive and desired for this reason - beautiful, accurate color. Every IPS monitor owner knows about "IPS glow" or "backlight bleed" as you refer to it. It occurs any time the monitor is completely black, like when your PC is posting, or timing out - not during a dark game like Batman Arkham Knight or gaming in dark environments. I have never, ever experienced backlight bleed during a gaming session- just beautiful colors. Some individuals just cant deal with it in the brief seconds they are looking at a black screen. When do you ever just look at a black screen? Personally- never, because I am either working or gaming.

1080p and 4K also have IPS or "in plane switching" panels. I am surprised that you have only experienced backlight bleed on 1440p gaming monitors..... If you do not have backlight bleed, it is either because you have a TN or VA panel - both of which are less desirable in the context of accurate colors. TN panels color looks "washed out" even with 144 hz . VA panels are slightly better, but there are issues with those as well. Gaming monitor manufacturers listened to the community wanting more accurate, vibrant colors- and started implementing IPS panels (which used to be impossibly expensive and technology had not caught up to the high refresh rates).

Gamers wanted more vibrant color, high refresh rates, no screen tearing and larger resolutions - and that is exactly what they got with 1440p overclockable IPS gaming monitors. Yet some complain about "backlight bleed". It is like complaining about whether the back of the panel has a glossy or matte finish- once you start utilizing the monitor for work or gaming- you simply will not notice or care.

For 1080p you do not even need a 10 series card- most 970s and 980 will push anything you can throw at them even at 144hz. 4K is even more pixels and way more taxing on your system. Lowering settings on 4K for 60hz and 60 fps max for a slightly higher pixel density would not be my choice when I could play on Ultra at 1440p at up to 144 hz/165hz 144 fps/165 fps .

really the 10 series as u just mentioned , the gtx 1080 only can produce up to upper 40s- 50s fps in 4k lowering the settings will increase the frame rates but I own 2 gtx 1070s with a pb287 model 4k monitor and getting over a 100 fps on newer games like gta 5 and rise of the tomb raider and older games over 140 fps without a notice of screen tearing that is what you're going to worry about but with this model I haven't noticed it and it's clearer and the colors are pretty much accurate

*throws hands up* Lowering settings at 4K to get high frame rates is defintely a tradeoff- especially when you are only able to visualize 60 fps (since 60 hz seems to be the highest threshold currently)

IMHO this is your contemplated choices as initially stated 1440p of 4K, correct? sshortguy seems to be locked into 4K. I am of the opinion that 1440p is the most beneficial with your existing components. You can definitely push high fps at decent to ultra settings with your single 1070 (which is touted as the ideal 1440p card). If you decided to buy an additional 1070, I have seen some videos online that seem to suggest 1070 SLI is a good config. I had 6 series cards back in the day and dealt with some micro-stutter issues with my SLI config. Perhaps that is not as common. I prefer a single card solution- thats just me.

27" 4K monitors are more affordable than the Gsync high refresh rate gaming monitors - but you only get 60 fps for a little more screen real estate. You cannot enjoy ultra settings because you have to turn your settings down. This is a clear indicator that the 1070 is not ideal with 4K. In terms of gaming, at 4K you get better visuals (but have to turn settings down for performance and your 1070 will struggle a bit). Why compromise?

1440p with gsync and high refresh rates will cost you a bit more, but yields a lot of performance and immersive features with 144 hz and gsync technology. . At 1440 p, you get stunning visuals and high performance with the gsync and high refresh rates while utilizing your card to its fullest potential. The 1070 is a beautiful match for a 1440p gaming monitor. Beautiful visuals and high performance with little or no compromise.

no matter what resolution or gpu u have there's times you will need to lower the settings it happens regardless what game you're playing 4k 2 k or 1080 p like back in the day where the gtx 680 came out it was the flag ship of gpus but on some games you just have to lower some settings

 

[_MOJO_]

Im not sure you understand my setup. These are four different sized monitors.I do not game on all four at the same time- only the ROG Swift. Your 1070s with settings turned down will push 144 hz. My Titan Pascal will push 165 HZ on Ultra (sometimes constant) at 1440p. The PascalTitan gets hot for it's famed throttling issues- but I plan on buying a water block soon.

You cannot possibly think I would game on this oddly configured mutli-monitor setup? My contribution to this thread was to share "Any input regarding monitor selection (or even alternative build plans) is welcome and appreciated."

When seeking out my monitors, other's input was valuable for me, especially when it was with merit and experienced knowledge. I have a wide range of monitors and I have benchmarked them all intensively side by side at different resolutions focusing on the advantages/disadvantages of gsync/high refresh rates vs. 60hz with noticeable input lag.

Again, Bottom line: I think for your build with a 1070 (or two), the returns on a 1440 p high refresh rate monitor with gsync are totally worth it - if you have the money.

I've tried using 1440p 144 hz monitors in the past especially with the acer and asus pg278q and the pg279q and they were terrible for back light bleeds 1 had 1 so bad that it shown on the edges of the desktop screen to get rid of the back light bleeds is either go with 1080 p monitors or 4k I haven't had issues with that on either monitors

Backlight bleed is such a non-point in my opinion. I am a graphic designer and digital illustrator. I have worked in gaming studios for years now. Anyone who has ever done digital photography, video editing, graphic design on a PC or MAC knows that the IPS monitor is the best monitor for accurately displaying colors to almost 100% color accuracy in the RGB spectrum. IPS monitors have always been more expensive and desired for this reason - beautiful, accurate color. Every IPS monitor owner knows about "IPS glow" or "backlight bleed" as you refer to it. It occurs any time the monitor is completely black, like when your PC is posting, or timing out - not during a dark game like Batman Arkham Knight or gaming in dark environments. I have never, ever experienced backlight bleed during a gaming session- just beautiful colors. Some individuals just cant deal with it in the brief seconds they are looking at a black screen. When do you ever just look at a black screen? Personally- never, because I am either working or gaming.

1080p and 4K also have IPS or "in plane switching" panels. I am surprised that you have only experienced backlight bleed on 1440p gaming monitors..... If you do not have backlight bleed, it is either because you have a TN or VA panel - both of which are less desirable in the context of accurate colors. TN panels color looks "washed out" even with 144 hz . VA panels are slightly better, but there are issues with those as well. Gaming monitor manufacturers listened to the community wanting more accurate, vibrant colors- and started implementing IPS panels (which used to be impossibly expensive and technology had not caught up to the high refresh rates).

Gamers wanted more vibrant color, high refresh rates, no screen tearing and larger resolutions - and that is exactly what they got with 1440p overclockable IPS gaming monitors. Yet some complain about "backlight bleed". It is like complaining about whether the back of the panel has a glossy or matte finish- once you start utilizing the monitor for work or gaming- you simply will not notice or care.

For 1080p you do not even need a 10 series card- most 970s and 980 will push anything you can throw at them even at 144hz. 4K is even more pixels and way more taxing on your system. Lowering settings on 4K for 60hz and 60 fps max for a slightly higher pixel density would not be my choice when I could play on Ultra at 1440p at up to 144 hz/165hz 144 fps/165 fps .

really the 10 series as u just mentioned , the gtx 1080 only can produce up to upper 40s- 50s fps in 4k lowering the settings will increase the frame rates but I own 2 gtx 1070s with a pb287 model 4k monitor and getting over a 100 fps on newer games like gta 5 and rise of the tomb raider and older games over 140 fps without a notice of screen tearing that is what you're going to worry about but with this model I haven't noticed it and it's clearer and the colors are pretty much accurate

*throws hands up* Lowering settings at 4K to get high frame rates is defintely a tradeoff- especially when you are only able to visualize 60 fps (since 60 hz seems to be the highest threshold currently)

IMHO this is your contemplated choices as initially stated 1440p of 4K, correct? sshortguy seems to be locked into 4K. I am of the opinion that 1440p is the most beneficial with your existing components. You can definitely push high fps at decent to ultra settings with your single 1070 (which is touted as the ideal 1440p card). If you decided to buy an additional 1070, I have seen some videos online that seem to suggest 1070 SLI is a good config. I had 6 series cards back in the day and dealt with some micro-stutter issues with my SLI config. Perhaps that is not as common. I prefer a single card solution- thats just me.

27" 4K monitors are more affordable than the Gsync high refresh rate gaming monitors - but you only get 60 fps for a little more screen real estate. You cannot enjoy ultra settings because you have to turn your settings down. This is a clear indicator that the 1070 is not ideal with 4K. In terms of gaming, at 4K you get better visuals (but have to turn settings down for performance and your 1070 will struggle a bit). Why compromise?

1440p with gsync and high refresh rates will cost you a bit more, but yields a lot of performance and immersive features with 144 hz and gsync technology. . At 1440 p, you get stunning visuals and high performance with the gsync and high refresh rates while utilizing your card to its fullest potential. The 1070 is a beautiful match for a 1440p gaming monitor. Beautiful visuals and high performance with little or no compromise.

no matter what resolution or gpu u have there's times you will need to lower the settings it happens regardless what game you're playing 4k 2 k or 1080 p like back in the day where the gtx 680 came out it was the flag ship of gpus but on some games you just have to lower some settings

I disagree. I have a 165 hz 1440p monitor. I play virtually all games on very high or ultra settings far above a smooth 60fps. I can play War Thunder on "Movie Settings" at almost 200fps. CSGO's fps at ULTRA is far beyond the monitor capability.

I happened to come across an opportunity to buy a friend's TITAN X Pascal for $1000 US. The TITAN X Pascal has been out for about a month now. I could not believe the luck quite honestly. Some would say the card is "overkill" or not worth $1200. The GTX 1080 I originally wanted was close substantial in price, but I figure the 1080 TI might be close to the Titan's performance so I popped on the purchase. I had actually tried to get the ASUS GTX 1080 STRIX, and when I was told I could get the TITAN for a couple of hundred more, I jumped at the opportunity. My transition has been from The ROG GTX 980 MATRIX PLATINUM 4GB GPU.

Overall performance?

The Titan X just simply does what you would expect. My rig is dated, a Z87 MOBO, but the Titan still exceeds expectations in every way. The jump from the 980 is substantial.

I ran everything at stock speeds

Benchmarks:

3D Mark Time Spy
GTX 980 score - 4337
TITAN X score - 7399 better than 91% of all results

Firestrike
GTX 980 score - 11104
TITAN X score - 18596 better than 97% of all results

Firestrike Extreme
GTX 980 score - 6067
TITAN X score - 11104 Better than 92% of all results

Unigine Valley Benchmark 1.0 Ultra settings

FPS: 132.7
Score 5552
Min FPS: 45.3
MAX FPS 205.7

Unigine Heaven Benchmark 4.0 Ultra Settings

FPS: 148.8
Score: 3749
Min FPS: 9.3
MAX Fps: 295.2

What resolution are you gaming?

2560 X 1440

How is your fps in games?

Assassin's Creed Unity, Ultra High, FXAA 77.3
Ashes of the Singularity, Extreme, 0x MSAA, DX12 81.4
Crysis 3, Very High, SMAA T2x 99.8
The Division, Ultra, SMAA 82.8
Far Cry Primal, Ultra, SMAA 93.3
Hitman, Ultra, SMAA, DX12 100.4
Rise of the Tomb Raider, Very High, High Textures, SMAA, DX12 107.6
The Witcher 3, Ultra, Post AA, No HairWorks 104.1

Gsync and 144 hz look amazing!

 

[sshortguy1]

to me performance and cost don't add up , I have 2 gtx 1070s in SLI and I get 120s to 140s in 4k , considering it as in 2k it be a lot higher than that for the cost what I paid was under 1000 dollars plain n simple but the titan x as I seen that had 4 titan xs and only gotten a increase of 20 % increase of performance as to 1 gtx 1080
I talked to nvidia about their cost and performance ratio and they even said the titan x wasn't intended for a gaming card as I already knew the gtx 1080 strix has a power speed of 1861 MHz but for a 150 dollars more I gotten a increase of 40 % over the gtx 1080 , explain to me if you think that the titan x is faster than the gtx 1080 other than the increase of 4 gigs of vram ?

 

[sshortguy1]

I just happened to cross a youtube video that compared the gtx 1070 in SLI vs the goliath of the gpus the pascal titan x he ran benchmarks on the titan x and gtx 1070 sli ran around 15 games on it and from his benchmarks tech of tom even said it shows that the gtx 1070 in SLI kicks the ass of of the new titan x in sli , if anybody knew about SLI should of known this , from my experience i'm definitely not new to SLI configs been using on multible cards from the past gtx 970 to gtx 980 ti SLI to the gtx 1070 , so even seen a video comparing the gtx 970 in SLI to the old titan x and like I said b4 it beats it pretty bad

 

[sshortguy1]

Im not sure you understand my setup. These are four different sized monitors.I do not game on all four at the same time- only the ROG Swift. Your 1070s with settings turned down will push 144 hz. My Titan Pascal will push 165 HZ on Ultra (sometimes constant) at 1440p. The PascalTitan gets hot for it's famed throttling issues- but I plan on buying a water block soon.

You cannot possibly think I would game on this oddly configured mutli-monitor setup? My contribution to this thread was to share "Any input regarding monitor selection (or even alternative build plans) is welcome and appreciated."

When seeking out my monitors, other's input was valuable for me, especially when it was with merit and experienced knowledge. I have a wide range of monitors and I have benchmarked them all intensively side by side at different resolutions focusing on the advantages/disadvantages of gsync/high refresh rates vs. 60hz with noticeable input lag.

Again, Bottom line: I think for your build with a 1070 (or two), the returns on a 1440 p high refresh rate monitor with gsync are totally worth it - if you have the money.

I've tried using 1440p 144 hz monitors in the past especially with the acer and asus pg278q and the pg279q and they were terrible for back light bleeds 1 had 1 so bad that it shown on the edges of the desktop screen to get rid of the back light bleeds is either go with 1080 p monitors or 4k I haven't had issues with that on either monitors

Backlight bleed is such a non-point in my opinion. I am a graphic designer and digital illustrator. I have worked in gaming studios for years now. Anyone who has ever done digital photography, video editing, graphic design on a PC or MAC knows that the IPS monitor is the best monitor for accurately displaying colors to almost 100% color accuracy in the RGB spectrum. IPS monitors have always been more expensive and desired for this reason - beautiful, accurate color. Every IPS monitor owner knows about "IPS glow" or "backlight bleed" as you refer to it. It occurs any time the monitor is completely black, like when your PC is posting, or timing out - not during a dark game like Batman Arkham Knight or gaming in dark environments. I have never, ever experienced backlight bleed during a gaming session- just beautiful colors. Some individuals just cant deal with it in the brief seconds they are looking at a black screen. When do you ever just look at a black screen? Personally- never, because I am either working or gaming.

1080p and 4K also have IPS or "in plane switching" panels. I am surprised that you have only experienced backlight bleed on 1440p gaming monitors..... If you do not have backlight bleed, it is either because you have a TN or VA panel - both of which are less desirable in the context of accurate colors. TN panels color looks "washed out" even with 144 hz . VA panels are slightly better, but there are issues with those as well. Gaming monitor manufacturers listened to the community wanting more accurate, vibrant colors- and started implementing IPS panels (which used to be impossibly expensive and technology had not caught up to the high refresh rates).

Gamers wanted more vibrant color, high refresh rates, no screen tearing and larger resolutions - and that is exactly what they got with 1440p overclockable IPS gaming monitors. Yet some complain about "backlight bleed". It is like complaining about whether the back of the panel has a glossy or matte finish- once you start utilizing the monitor for work or gaming- you simply will not notice or care.

For 1080p you do not even need a 10 series card- most 970s and 980 will push anything you can throw at them even at 144hz. 4K is even more pixels and way more taxing on your system. Lowering settings on 4K for 60hz and 60 fps max for a slightly higher pixel density would not be my choice when I could play on Ultra at 1440p at up to 144 hz/165hz 144 fps/165 fps .

really the 10 series as u just mentioned , the gtx 1080 only can produce up to upper 40s- 50s fps in 4k lowering the settings will increase the frame rates but I own 2 gtx 1070s with a pb287 model 4k monitor and getting over a 100 fps on newer games like gta 5 and rise of the tomb raider and older games over 140 fps without a notice of screen tearing that is what you're going to worry about but with this model I haven't noticed it and it's clearer and the colors are pretty much accurate

*throws hands up* Lowering settings at 4K to get high frame rates is defintely a tradeoff- especially when you are only able to visualize 60 fps (since 60 hz seems to be the highest threshold currently)

IMHO this is your contemplated choices as initially stated 1440p of 4K, correct? sshortguy seems to be locked into 4K. I am of the opinion that 1440p is the most beneficial with your existing components. You can definitely push high fps at decent to ultra settings with your single 1070 (which is touted as the ideal 1440p card). If you decided to buy an additional 1070, I have seen some videos online that seem to suggest 1070 SLI is a good config. I had 6 series cards back in the day and dealt with some micro-stutter issues with my SLI config. Perhaps that is not as common. I prefer a single card solution- thats just me.

27" 4K monitors are more affordable than the Gsync high refresh rate gaming monitors - but you only get 60 fps for a little more screen real estate. You cannot enjoy ultra settings because you have to turn your settings down. This is a clear indicator that the 1070 is not ideal with 4K. In terms of gaming, at 4K you get better visuals (but have to turn settings down for performance and your 1070 will struggle a bit). Why compromise?

1440p with gsync and high refresh rates will cost you a bit more, but yields a lot of performance and immersive features with 144 hz and gsync technology. . At 1440 p, you get stunning visuals and high performance with the gsync and high refresh rates while utilizing your card to its fullest potential. The 1070 is a beautiful match for a 1440p gaming monitor. Beautiful visuals and high performance with little or no compromise.

no matter what resolution or gpu u have there's times you will need to lower the settings it happens regardless what game you're playing 4k 2 k or 1080 p like back in the day where the gtx 680 came out it was the flag ship of gpus but on some games you just have to lower some settings

I disagree. I have a 165 hz 1440p monitor. I play virtually all games on very high or ultra settings far above a smooth 60fps. I can play War Thunder on "Movie Settings" at almost 200fps. CSGO's fps at ULTRA is far beyond the monitor capability.

I happened to come across an opportunity to buy a friend's TITAN X Pascal for $1000 US. The TITAN X Pascal has been out for about a month now. I could not believe the luck quite honestly. Some would say the card is "overkill" or not worth $1200. The GTX 1080 I originally wanted was close substantial in price, but I figure the 1080 TI might be close to the Titan's performance so I popped on the purchase. I had actually tried to get the ASUS GTX 1080 STRIX, and when I was told I could get the TITAN for a couple of hundred more, I jumped at the opportunity. My transition has been from The ROG GTX 980 MATRIX PLATINUM 4GB GPU.

Overall performance?

The Titan X just simply does what you would expect. My rig is dated, a Z87 MOBO, but the Titan still exceeds expectations in every way. The jump from the 980 is substantial.

I ran everything at stock speeds

Benchmarks:

3D Mark Time Spy
GTX 980 score - 4337
TITAN X score - 7399 better than 91% of all results

Firestrike
GTX 980 score - 11104
TITAN X score - 18596 better than 97% of all results

Firestrike Extreme
GTX 980 score - 6067
TITAN X score - 11104 Better than 92% of all results

Unigine Valley Benchmark 1.0 Ultra settings

FPS: 132.7
Score 5552
Min FPS: 45.3
MAX FPS 205.7

Unigine Heaven Benchmark 4.0 Ultra Settings

FPS: 148.8
Score: 3749
Min FPS: 9.3
MAX Fps: 295.2

What resolution are you gaming?

2560 X 1440

How is your fps in games?

Assassin's Creed Unity, Ultra High, FXAA 77.3
Ashes of the Singularity, Extreme, 0x MSAA, DX12 81.4
Crysis 3, Very High, SMAA T2x 99.8
The Division, Ultra, SMAA 82.8
Far Cry Primal, Ultra, SMAA 93.3
Hitman, Ultra, SMAA, DX12 100.4
Rise of the Tomb Raider, Very High, High Textures, SMAA, DX12 107.6
The Witcher 3, Ultra, Post AA, No HairWorks 104.1

Gsync and 144 hz look amazing!

if you buy it you'll be a smuck , b/c from the benchmarks on fire strike 7735 in SLI to the titan x 6825 shadow of mordor 74.1 to 66.1 in 4k 2k 142,3 to 127.5 fps gta 5 maxed out 77.6 fps to 70 fps tose are just a few that was on there check it yourself GTX 1070 SLI Vs TITAN X (PASCAL)

 

[_MOJO_]

Im not sure you understand my setup. These are four different sized monitors.I do not game on all four at the same time- only the ROG Swift. Your 1070s with settings turned down will push 144 hz. My Titan Pascal will push 165 HZ on Ultra (sometimes constant) at 1440p. The PascalTitan gets hot for it's famed throttling issues- but I plan on buying a water block soon.

You cannot possibly think I would game on this oddly configured mutli-monitor setup? My contribution to this thread was to share "Any input regarding monitor selection (or even alternative build plans) is welcome and appreciated."

When seeking out my monitors, other's input was valuable for me, especially when it was with merit and experienced knowledge. I have a wide range of monitors and I have benchmarked them all intensively side by side at different resolutions focusing on the advantages/disadvantages of gsync/high refresh rates vs. 60hz with noticeable input lag.

Again, Bottom line: I think for your build with a 1070 (or two), the returns on a 1440 p high refresh rate monitor with gsync are totally worth it - if you have the money.

I've tried using 1440p 144 hz monitors in the past especially with the acer and asus pg278q and the pg279q and they were terrible for back light bleeds 1 had 1 so bad that it shown on the edges of the desktop screen to get rid of the back light bleeds is either go with 1080 p monitors or 4k I haven't had issues with that on either monitors

Backlight bleed is such a non-point in my opinion. I am a graphic designer and digital illustrator. I have worked in gaming studios for years now. Anyone who has ever done digital photography, video editing, graphic design on a PC or MAC knows that the IPS monitor is the best monitor for accurately displaying colors to almost 100% color accuracy in the RGB spectrum. IPS monitors have always been more expensive and desired for this reason - beautiful, accurate color. Every IPS monitor owner knows about "IPS glow" or "backlight bleed" as you refer to it. It occurs any time the monitor is completely black, like when your PC is posting, or timing out - not during a dark game like Batman Arkham Knight or gaming in dark environments. I have never, ever experienced backlight bleed during a gaming session- just beautiful colors. Some individuals just cant deal with it in the brief seconds they are looking at a black screen. When do you ever just look at a black screen? Personally- never, because I am either working or gaming.

1080p and 4K also have IPS or "in plane switching" panels. I am surprised that you have only experienced backlight bleed on 1440p gaming monitors..... If you do not have backlight bleed, it is either because you have a TN or VA panel - both of which are less desirable in the context of accurate colors. TN panels color looks "washed out" even with 144 hz . VA panels are slightly better, but there are issues with those as well. Gaming monitor manufacturers listened to the community wanting more accurate, vibrant colors- and started implementing IPS panels (which used to be impossibly expensive and technology had not caught up to the high refresh rates).

Gamers wanted more vibrant color, high refresh rates, no screen tearing and larger resolutions - and that is exactly what they got with 1440p overclockable IPS gaming monitors. Yet some complain about "backlight bleed". It is like complaining about whether the back of the panel has a glossy or matte finish- once you start utilizing the monitor for work or gaming- you simply will not notice or care.

For 1080p you do not even need a 10 series card- most 970s and 980 will push anything you can throw at them even at 144hz. 4K is even more pixels and way more taxing on your system. Lowering settings on 4K for 60hz and 60 fps max for a slightly higher pixel density would not be my choice when I could play on Ultra at 1440p at up to 144 hz/165hz 144 fps/165 fps .

really the 10 series as u just mentioned , the gtx 1080 only can produce up to upper 40s- 50s fps in 4k lowering the settings will increase the frame rates but I own 2 gtx 1070s with a pb287 model 4k monitor and getting over a 100 fps on newer games like gta 5 and rise of the tomb raider and older games over 140 fps without a notice of screen tearing that is what you're going to worry about but with this model I haven't noticed it and it's clearer and the colors are pretty much accurate

*throws hands up* Lowering settings at 4K to get high frame rates is defintely a tradeoff- especially when you are only able to visualize 60 fps (since 60 hz seems to be the highest threshold currently)

IMHO this is your contemplated choices as initially stated 1440p of 4K, correct? sshortguy seems to be locked into 4K. I am of the opinion that 1440p is the most beneficial with your existing components. You can definitely push high fps at decent to ultra settings with your single 1070 (which is touted as the ideal 1440p card). If you decided to buy an additional 1070, I have seen some videos online that seem to suggest 1070 SLI is a good config. I had 6 series cards back in the day and dealt with some micro-stutter issues with my SLI config. Perhaps that is not as common. I prefer a single card solution- thats just me.

27" 4K monitors are more affordable than the Gsync high refresh rate gaming monitors - but you only get 60 fps for a little more screen real estate. You cannot enjoy ultra settings because you have to turn your settings down. This is a clear indicator that the 1070 is not ideal with 4K. In terms of gaming, at 4K you get better visuals (but have to turn settings down for performance and your 1070 will struggle a bit). Why compromise?

1440p with gsync and high refresh rates will cost you a bit more, but yields a lot of performance and immersive features with 144 hz and gsync technology. . At 1440 p, you get stunning visuals and high performance with the gsync and high refresh rates while utilizing your card to its fullest potential. The 1070 is a beautiful match for a 1440p gaming monitor. Beautiful visuals and high performance with little or no compromise.

no matter what resolution or gpu u have there's times you will need to lower the settings it happens regardless what game you're playing 4k 2 k or 1080 p like back in the day where the gtx 680 came out it was the flag ship of gpus but on some games you just have to lower some settings

I disagree. I have a 165 hz 1440p monitor. I play virtually all games on very high or ultra settings far above a smooth 60fps. I can play War Thunder on "Movie Settings" at almost 200fps. CSGO's fps at ULTRA is far beyond the monitor capability.

I happened to come across an opportunity to buy a friend's TITAN X Pascal for $1000 US. The TITAN X Pascal has been out for about a month now. I could not believe the luck quite honestly. Some would say the card is "overkill" or not worth $1200. The GTX 1080 I originally wanted was close substantial in price, but I figure the 1080 TI might be close to the Titan's performance so I popped on the purchase. I had actually tried to get the ASUS GTX 1080 STRIX, and when I was told I could get the TITAN for a couple of hundred more, I jumped at the opportunity. My transition has been from The ROG GTX 980 MATRIX PLATINUM 4GB GPU.

Overall performance?

The Titan X just simply does what you would expect. My rig is dated, a Z87 MOBO, but the Titan still exceeds expectations in every way. The jump from the 980 is substantial.

I ran everything at stock speeds

Benchmarks:

3D Mark Time Spy
GTX 980 score - 4337
TITAN X score - 7399 better than 91% of all results

Firestrike
GTX 980 score - 11104
TITAN X score - 18596 better than 97% of all results

Firestrike Extreme
GTX 980 score - 6067
TITAN X score - 11104 Better than 92% of all results

Unigine Valley Benchmark 1.0 Ultra settings

FPS: 132.7
Score 5552
Min FPS: 45.3
MAX FPS 205.7

Unigine Heaven Benchmark 4.0 Ultra Settings

FPS: 148.8
Score: 3749
Min FPS: 9.3
MAX Fps: 295.2

What resolution are you gaming?

2560 X 1440

How is your fps in games?

Assassin's Creed Unity, Ultra High, FXAA 77.3
Ashes of the Singularity, Extreme, 0x MSAA, DX12 81.4
Crysis 3, Very High, SMAA T2x 99.8
The Division, Ultra, SMAA 82.8
Far Cry Primal, Ultra, SMAA 93.3
Hitman, Ultra, SMAA, DX12 100.4
Rise of the Tomb Raider, Very High, High Textures, SMAA, DX12 107.6
The Witcher 3, Ultra, Post AA, No HairWorks 104.1

Gsync and 144 hz look amazing!

if you buy it you'll be a smuck , b/c from the benchmarks on fire strike 7735 in SLI to the titan x 6825 shadow of mordor 74.1 to 66.1 in 4k 2k 142,3 to 127.5 fps gta 5 maxed out 77.6 fps to 70 fps tose are just a few that was on there check it yourself GTX 1070 SLI Vs TITAN X (PASCAL)

I guess I am a "shmuck" then. I did my research and actually considered 1070 SLI . I mean, it is cheaper, it only seems logical to spend less for SLI vs. a substantially more expensive single card solution, right? Maybe....... I will say that 1070 SLI, while technically performs better than the Titan in some titles , 1070 SLI is not without its own list of issues (that a lot of tech reviewers fail to mention in some cases). I have saved money in the past with SLI solutions, only to deal with the headache and unpredictability of SLI. I dealt with microstuttering, turning my PC into a space heater at load in long gaming sessions, scaling issues with random titles (depending on patches or updates) , fan noise, excessive power draw, and just general unpredictability. Honestly, SLI was the reason I paid extra for the peace of mind with a single card solution. Also, my PC is a workstation before it is a gaming PC. I went with the solution I thought worked best for me. I hope I have shared some insightful input. Do what works best for you.

 

[sshortguy1]

i'm not saying that the titan x pascal isn't a good card but there's other ways to increase the cost n performance ratios then going with the just highest single card out there , I've been doing SLI for some time now and haven't had microstutter or any other issues not like when the gtx 970s came out and you played a game and noticed that the sli config was turned off , but with the 1070s I never had had the issue with getting turned off and like a lot of those reviewers said that the new cards are new in time the sli configs would get better drivers etc so in time they'll improve in performance

 

[sshortguy1]

Im not sure you understand my setup. These are four different sized monitors.I do not game on all four at the same time- only the ROG Swift. Your 1070s with settings turned down will push 144 hz. My Titan Pascal will push 165 HZ on Ultra (sometimes constant) at 1440p. The PascalTitan gets hot for it's famed throttling issues- but I plan on buying a water block soon.

You cannot possibly think I would game on this oddly configured mutli-monitor setup? My contribution to this thread was to share "Any input regarding monitor selection (or even alternative build plans) is welcome and appreciated."

When seeking out my monitors, other's input was valuable for me, especially when it was with merit and experienced knowledge. I have a wide range of monitors and I have benchmarked them all intensively side by side at different resolutions focusing on the advantages/disadvantages of gsync/high refresh rates vs. 60hz with noticeable input lag.

Again, Bottom line: I think for your build with a 1070 (or two), the returns on a 1440 p high refresh rate monitor with gsync are totally worth it - if you have the money.

I've tried using 1440p 144 hz monitors in the past especially with the acer and asus pg278q and the pg279q and they were terrible for back light bleeds 1 had 1 so bad that it shown on the edges of the desktop screen to get rid of the back light bleeds is either go with 1080 p monitors or 4k I haven't had issues with that on either monitors

Backlight bleed is such a non-point in my opinion. I am a graphic designer and digital illustrator. I have worked in gaming studios for years now. Anyone who has ever done digital photography, video editing, graphic design on a PC or MAC knows that the IPS monitor is the best monitor for accurately displaying colors to almost 100% color accuracy in the RGB spectrum. IPS monitors have always been more expensive and desired for this reason - beautiful, accurate color. Every IPS monitor owner knows about "IPS glow" or "backlight bleed" as you refer to it. It occurs any time the monitor is completely black, like when your PC is posting, or timing out - not during a dark game like Batman Arkham Knight or gaming in dark environments. I have never, ever experienced backlight bleed during a gaming session- just beautiful colors. Some individuals just cant deal with it in the brief seconds they are looking at a black screen. When do you ever just look at a black screen? Personally- never, because I am either working or gaming.

1080p and 4K also have IPS or "in plane switching" panels. I am surprised that you have only experienced backlight bleed on 1440p gaming monitors..... If you do not have backlight bleed, it is either because you have a TN or VA panel - both of which are less desirable in the context of accurate colors. TN panels color looks "washed out" even with 144 hz . VA panels are slightly better, but there are issues with those as well. Gaming monitor manufacturers listened to the community wanting more accurate, vibrant colors- and started implementing IPS panels (which used to be impossibly expensive and technology had not caught up to the high refresh rates).

Gamers wanted more vibrant color, high refresh rates, no screen tearing and larger resolutions - and that is exactly what they got with 1440p overclockable IPS gaming monitors. Yet some complain about "backlight bleed". It is like complaining about whether the back of the panel has a glossy or matte finish- once you start utilizing the monitor for work or gaming- you simply will not notice or care.

For 1080p you do not even need a 10 series card- most 970s and 980 will push anything you can throw at them even at 144hz. 4K is even more pixels and way more taxing on your system. Lowering settings on 4K for 60hz and 60 fps max for a slightly higher pixel density would not be my choice when I could play on Ultra at 1440p at up to 144 hz/165hz 144 fps/165 fps .

really the 10 series as u just mentioned , the gtx 1080 only can produce up to upper 40s- 50s fps in 4k lowering the settings will increase the frame rates but I own 2 gtx 1070s with a pb287 model 4k monitor and getting over a 100 fps on newer games like gta 5 and rise of the tomb raider and older games over 140 fps without a notice of screen tearing that is what you're going to worry about but with this model I haven't noticed it and it's clearer and the colors are pretty much accurate

*throws hands up* Lowering settings at 4K to get high frame rates is defintely a tradeoff- especially when you are only able to visualize 60 fps (since 60 hz seems to be the highest threshold currently)

IMHO this is your contemplated choices as initially stated 1440p of 4K, correct? sshortguy seems to be locked into 4K. I am of the opinion that 1440p is the most beneficial with your existing components. You can definitely push high fps at decent to ultra settings with your single 1070 (which is touted as the ideal 1440p card). If you decided to buy an additional 1070, I have seen some videos online that seem to suggest 1070 SLI is a good config. I had 6 series cards back in the day and dealt with some micro-stutter issues with my SLI config. Perhaps that is not as common. I prefer a single card solution- thats just me.

27" 4K monitors are more affordable than the Gsync high refresh rate gaming monitors - but you only get 60 fps for a little more screen real estate. You cannot enjoy ultra settings because you have to turn your settings down. This is a clear indicator that the 1070 is not ideal with 4K. In terms of gaming, at 4K you get better visuals (but have to turn settings down for performance and your 1070 will struggle a bit). Why compromise?

1440p with gsync and high refresh rates will cost you a bit more, but yields a lot of performance and immersive features with 144 hz and gsync technology. . At 1440 p, you get stunning visuals and high performance with the gsync and high refresh rates while utilizing your card to its fullest potential. The 1070 is a beautiful match for a 1440p gaming monitor. Beautiful visuals and high performance with little or no compromise.

no matter what resolution or gpu u have there's times you will need to lower the settings it happens regardless what game you're playing 4k 2 k or 1080 p like back in the day where the gtx 680 came out it was the flag ship of gpus but on some games you just have to lower some settings

I disagree. I have a 165 hz 1440p monitor. I play virtually all games on very high or ultra settings far above a smooth 60fps. I can play War Thunder on "Movie Settings" at almost 200fps. CSGO's fps at ULTRA is far beyond the monitor capability.

I happened to come across an opportunity to buy a friend's TITAN X Pascal for $1000 US. The TITAN X Pascal has been out for about a month now. I could not believe the luck quite honestly. Some would say the card is "overkill" or not worth $1200. The GTX 1080 I originally wanted was close substantial in price, but I figure the 1080 TI might be close to the Titan's performance so I popped on the purchase. I had actually tried to get the ASUS GTX 1080 STRIX, and when I was told I could get the TITAN for a couple of hundred more, I jumped at the opportunity. My transition has been from The ROG GTX 980 MATRIX PLATINUM 4GB GPU.

Overall performance?

The Titan X just simply does what you would expect. My rig is dated, a Z87 MOBO, but the Titan still exceeds expectations in every way. The jump from the 980 is substantial.

I ran everything at stock speeds

Benchmarks:

3D Mark Time Spy
GTX 980 score - 4337
TITAN X score - 7399 better than 91% of all results

Firestrike
GTX 980 score - 11104
TITAN X score - 18596 better than 97% of all results

Firestrike Extreme
GTX 980 score - 6067
TITAN X score - 11104 Better than 92% of all results

Unigine Valley Benchmark 1.0 Ultra settings

FPS: 132.7
Score 5552
Min FPS: 45.3
MAX FPS 205.7

Unigine Heaven Benchmark 4.0 Ultra Settings

FPS: 148.8
Score: 3749
Min FPS: 9.3
MAX Fps: 295.2

What resolution are you gaming?

2560 X 1440

How is your fps in games?

Assassin's Creed Unity, Ultra High, FXAA 77.3
Ashes of the Singularity, Extreme, 0x MSAA, DX12 81.4
Crysis 3, Very High, SMAA T2x 99.8
The Division, Ultra, SMAA 82.8
Far Cry Primal, Ultra, SMAA 93.3
Hitman, Ultra, SMAA, DX12 100.4
Rise of the Tomb Raider, Very High, High Textures, SMAA, DX12 107.6
The Witcher 3, Ultra, Post AA, No HairWorks 104.1

Gsync and 144 hz look amazing!

if you buy it you'll be a smuck , b/c from the benchmarks on fire strike 7735 in SLI to the titan x 6825 shadow of mordor 74.1 to 66.1 in 4k 2k 142,3 to 127.5 fps gta 5 maxed out 77.6 fps to 70 fps tose are just a few that was on there check it yourself GTX 1070 SLI Vs TITAN X (PASCAL)

I guess I am a "shmuck" then. I did my research and actually considered 1070 SLI . I mean, it is cheaper, it only seems logical to spend less for SLI vs. a substantially more expensive single card solution, right? Maybe....... I will say that 1070 SLI, while technically performs better than the Titan in some titles , 1070 SLI is not without its own list of issues (that a lot of tech reviewers fail to mention in some cases). I have saved money in the past with SLI solutions, only to deal with the headache and unpredictability of SLI. I dealt with microstuttering, turning my PC into a space heater at load in long gaming sessions, scaling issues with random titles (depending on patches or updates) , fan noise, excessive power draw, and just general unpredictability. Honestly, SLI was the reason I paid extra for the peace of mind with a single card solution. Also, my PC is a workstation before it is a gaming PC. I went with the solution I thought worked best for me. I hope I have shared some insightful input. Do what works best for you.

did you happen to look at the video on youtube ??

GTX 1070 SLI Vs TITAN X (PASCAL) by tech of tomorrow

 

[sshortguy1]

that'll give you a general idea on what the performances will be against the titan x

 

[_MOJO_]

Im not sure you understand my setup. These are four different sized monitors.I do not game on all four at the same time- only the ROG Swift. Your 1070s with settings turned down will push 144 hz. My Titan Pascal will push 165 HZ on Ultra (sometimes constant) at 1440p. The PascalTitan gets hot for it's famed throttling issues- but I plan on buying a water block soon.

You cannot possibly think I would game on this oddly configured mutli-monitor setup? My contribution to this thread was to share "Any input regarding monitor selection (or even alternative build plans) is welcome and appreciated."

When seeking out my monitors, other's input was valuable for me, especially when it was with merit and experienced knowledge. I have a wide range of monitors and I have benchmarked them all intensively side by side at different resolutions focusing on the advantages/disadvantages of gsync/high refresh rates vs. 60hz with noticeable input lag.

Again, Bottom line: I think for your build with a 1070 (or two), the returns on a 1440 p high refresh rate monitor with gsync are totally worth it - if you have the money.

I've tried using 1440p 144 hz monitors in the past especially with the acer and asus pg278q and the pg279q and they were terrible for back light bleeds 1 had 1 so bad that it shown on the edges of the desktop screen to get rid of the back light bleeds is either go with 1080 p monitors or 4k I haven't had issues with that on either monitors

Backlight bleed is such a non-point in my opinion. I am a graphic designer and digital illustrator. I have worked in gaming studios for years now. Anyone who has ever done digital photography, video editing, graphic design on a PC or MAC knows that the IPS monitor is the best monitor for accurately displaying colors to almost 100% color accuracy in the RGB spectrum. IPS monitors have always been more expensive and desired for this reason - beautiful, accurate color. Every IPS monitor owner knows about "IPS glow" or "backlight bleed" as you refer to it. It occurs any time the monitor is completely black, like when your PC is posting, or timing out - not during a dark game like Batman Arkham Knight or gaming in dark environments. I have never, ever experienced backlight bleed during a gaming session- just beautiful colors. Some individuals just cant deal with it in the brief seconds they are looking at a black screen. When do you ever just look at a black screen? Personally- never, because I am either working or gaming.

1080p and 4K also have IPS or "in plane switching" panels. I am surprised that you have only experienced backlight bleed on 1440p gaming monitors..... If you do not have backlight bleed, it is either because you have a TN or VA panel - both of which are less desirable in the context of accurate colors. TN panels color looks "washed out" even with 144 hz . VA panels are slightly better, but there are issues with those as well. Gaming monitor manufacturers listened to the community wanting more accurate, vibrant colors- and started implementing IPS panels (which used to be impossibly expensive and technology had not caught up to the high refresh rates).

Gamers wanted more vibrant color, high refresh rates, no screen tearing and larger resolutions - and that is exactly what they got with 1440p overclockable IPS gaming monitors. Yet some complain about "backlight bleed". It is like complaining about whether the back of the panel has a glossy or matte finish- once you start utilizing the monitor for work or gaming- you simply will not notice or care.

For 1080p you do not even need a 10 series card- most 970s and 980 will push anything you can throw at them even at 144hz. 4K is even more pixels and way more taxing on your system. Lowering settings on 4K for 60hz and 60 fps max for a slightly higher pixel density would not be my choice when I could play on Ultra at 1440p at up to 144 hz/165hz 144 fps/165 fps .

really the 10 series as u just mentioned , the gtx 1080 only can produce up to upper 40s- 50s fps in 4k lowering the settings will increase the frame rates but I own 2 gtx 1070s with a pb287 model 4k monitor and getting over a 100 fps on newer games like gta 5 and rise of the tomb raider and older games over 140 fps without a notice of screen tearing that is what you're going to worry about but with this model I haven't noticed it and it's clearer and the colors are pretty much accurate

*throws hands up* Lowering settings at 4K to get high frame rates is defintely a tradeoff- especially when you are only able to visualize 60 fps (since 60 hz seems to be the highest threshold currently)

IMHO this is your contemplated choices as initially stated 1440p of 4K, correct? sshortguy seems to be locked into 4K. I am of the opinion that 1440p is the most beneficial with your existing components. You can definitely push high fps at decent to ultra settings with your single 1070 (which is touted as the ideal 1440p card). If you decided to buy an additional 1070, I have seen some videos online that seem to suggest 1070 SLI is a good config. I had 6 series cards back in the day and dealt with some micro-stutter issues with my SLI config. Perhaps that is not as common. I prefer a single card solution- thats just me.

27" 4K monitors are more affordable than the Gsync high refresh rate gaming monitors - but you only get 60 fps for a little more screen real estate. You cannot enjoy ultra settings because you have to turn your settings down. This is a clear indicator that the 1070 is not ideal with 4K. In terms of gaming, at 4K you get better visuals (but have to turn settings down for performance and your 1070 will struggle a bit). Why compromise?

1440p with gsync and high refresh rates will cost you a bit more, but yields a lot of performance and immersive features with 144 hz and gsync technology. . At 1440 p, you get stunning visuals and high performance with the gsync and high refresh rates while utilizing your card to its fullest potential. The 1070 is a beautiful match for a 1440p gaming monitor. Beautiful visuals and high performance with little or no compromise.

no matter what resolution or gpu u have there's times you will need to lower the settings it happens regardless what game you're playing 4k 2 k or 1080 p like back in the day where the gtx 680 came out it was the flag ship of gpus but on some games you just have to lower some settings

I disagree. I have a 165 hz 1440p monitor. I play virtually all games on very high or ultra settings far above a smooth 60fps. I can play War Thunder on "Movie Settings" at almost 200fps. CSGO's fps at ULTRA is far beyond the monitor capability.

I happened to come across an opportunity to buy a friend's TITAN X Pascal for $1000 US. The TITAN X Pascal has been out for about a month now. I could not believe the luck quite honestly. Some would say the card is "overkill" or not worth $1200. The GTX 1080 I originally wanted was close substantial in price, but I figure the 1080 TI might be close to the Titan's performance so I popped on the purchase. I had actually tried to get the ASUS GTX 1080 STRIX, and when I was told I could get the TITAN for a couple of hundred more, I jumped at the opportunity. My transition has been from The ROG GTX 980 MATRIX PLATINUM 4GB GPU.

Overall performance?

The Titan X just simply does what you would expect. My rig is dated, a Z87 MOBO, but the Titan still exceeds expectations in every way. The jump from the 980 is substantial.

I ran everything at stock speeds

Benchmarks:

3D Mark Time Spy
GTX 980 score - 4337
TITAN X score - 7399 better than 91% of all results

Firestrike
GTX 980 score - 11104
TITAN X score - 18596 better than 97% of all results

Firestrike Extreme
GTX 980 score - 6067
TITAN X score - 11104 Better than 92% of all results

Unigine Valley Benchmark 1.0 Ultra settings

FPS: 132.7
Score 5552
Min FPS: 45.3
MAX FPS 205.7

Unigine Heaven Benchmark 4.0 Ultra Settings

FPS: 148.8
Score: 3749
Min FPS: 9.3
MAX Fps: 295.2

What resolution are you gaming?

2560 X 1440

How is your fps in games?

Assassin's Creed Unity, Ultra High, FXAA 77.3
Ashes of the Singularity, Extreme, 0x MSAA, DX12 81.4
Crysis 3, Very High, SMAA T2x 99.8
The Division, Ultra, SMAA 82.8
Far Cry Primal, Ultra, SMAA 93.3
Hitman, Ultra, SMAA, DX12 100.4
Rise of the Tomb Raider, Very High, High Textures, SMAA, DX12 107.6
The Witcher 3, Ultra, Post AA, No HairWorks 104.1

Gsync and 144 hz look amazing!

if you buy it you'll be a smuck , b/c from the benchmarks on fire strike 7735 in SLI to the titan x 6825 shadow of mordor 74.1 to 66.1 in 4k 2k 142,3 to 127.5 fps gta 5 maxed out 77.6 fps to 70 fps tose are just a few that was on there check it yourself GTX 1070 SLI Vs TITAN X (PASCAL)

I guess I am a "shmuck" then. I did my research and actually considered 1070 SLI . I mean, it is cheaper, it only seems logical to spend less for SLI vs. a substantially more expensive single card solution, right? Maybe....... I will say that 1070 SLI, while technically performs better than the Titan in some titles , 1070 SLI is not without its own list of issues (that a lot of tech reviewers fail to mention in some cases). I have saved money in the past with SLI solutions, only to deal with the headache and unpredictability of SLI. I dealt with microstuttering, turning my PC into a space heater at load in long gaming sessions, scaling issues with random titles (depending on patches or updates) , fan noise, excessive power draw, and just general unpredictability. Honestly, SLI was the reason I paid extra for the peace of mind with a single card solution. Also, my PC is a workstation before it is a gaming PC. I went with the solution I thought worked best for me. I hope I have shared some insightful input. Do what works best for you.

did you happen to look at the video on youtube ??

GTX 1070 SLI Vs TITAN X (PASCAL) by tech of tomorrow

The Titan X Pascal card is for enthusiasts and not poor whiners. Don't like it, don't buy it. It's like trying to argue the merits of a exotic luxury car. Of course you can buy a cheaper mid-tier luxury car that costs less and still has most (not all) of the capabilities and luxuries/features of the exotic. BUT, in the end you still won't have that exotic car and still won't have all the exact same features and capabilities. The same exact logic applies to the Titan X. NOTHING can do what it does within the single GPU graphics gaming market for the price. The workstation version called "Tesla" costs much more at $5000. And guess what? Yup, Nvidia is sold out of both the Titan X and the Tesla cards! So, be mad all you want. The point is there is a market for these cards - period. So, if your only complaint is cost, then get over it and move on.

I know you are someone who needs to have the last word sshortguy1, so be my guest. Haters will hate.

 

[sshortguy1]

why should I be mad ?? i'm looking as a responsible consumer save a few hundred dollars and put it towards other parts etc if you really want to compare my system to yours i'm sure mine will beat y a 25 % margin , it'll beat your titan to the ground it'll cripple it as other reviewers mentioned so be happy with the little titan x and we'll hear you complain about how hot it gets and throttles as the reviewers mentioned