1440p Gaming PC need advice

[loso64]

As an counter argument to what i just posted tho. If you dont care about high refresh rates and eye candy (literally everything maxed out) you dont need 3080 and 3070 is more than great card for most users.

But if you can afford it, buy what your money affords you, it will last you longer and the cost of ownership is lower, than buying lower tier and upgrading sooner.

 

[hitman2195]

As an counter argument to what i just posted tho. If you dont care about high refresh rates and eye candy (literally everything maxed out) you dont need 3080 and 3070 is more than great card for most users.

But if you can afford it, buy what your money affords you, it will last you longer and the cost of ownership is lower, than buying lower tier and upgrading sooner.

People are saying the 8gb of ram of the 3070 will/could be an issue going forward.

Money isn't an issue and the wait time isn't something that would bother me either I also have a Samsung g7 which I believe is 244htz monitor.

I currently have a pc with a Gtx 1080ti and it does the job for now I just thought upgrading to 3080 over a 3070 will cover me for a bit longer before I had to/wanted to upgrade again.

 

[SpyderTracks]

i would like to point out one thing regards the conversation that 3070 is 1440p gaming card. All the benchmarks and games tested that people point out are 2-3 years old. Running on older engines, aimed at older consoles.
The same situation happened with 2060 ti few years back. People argued that it is 1440p card, yes it could run 1440p at that time, but year later it was no longer able to do it on newest titles.
Keep in mind we just have brand new generation of consoles going out. The games are only just being made for it and ported to PC. Good example is Cyberpunk (tho not great optimized game) this game takes a lot for any pc currently.
Do you wanna play games of yesterday or the games of tomorrow? If the answer is the latter, it is better to buy a card with a more power to spare, as newest games will be harder to run.

ps. not a jab at OP or anyone here. Just pointing out the flaws of youtube videos and their benchmarks. They only focus on years old games and make review based on that.

This is exactly what PC gaming is NOT about, this leads to poor performance over the longer term.

You never future proof a GPU, it leads to substantially higher investment for overall worse performance.

With a GPU, by the time you need that extra power, you upgrade to the newer GPU's and get the newer technologies as well as more power per £.

It's the basics of PC Gaming.

The only people who say things like this are console gamers who don't understand how to optimise settings on PC so expect every game HAS to be played maxxed out, that's just not true on PC.

 

[loso64]

This is exactly what PC gaming is NOT about, this leads to poor performance over the longer term.

You never future proof a GPU, it leads to substantially higher investment for overall worse performance.

With a GPU, by the time you need that extra power, you upgrade to the newer GPU's and get the newer technologies as well as more power per £.

It's the basics of PC Gaming.

The only people who say things like this are console gamers who don't understand how to optimise settings on PC so expect every game HAS to be played maxxed out, that's just not true on PC.

i do get your point, but i disagree. Good example is 1080TI i have currently. yes it is 4 years old gpu, but it still can run anything really. Now buying 1070 and then 2070 would overall cost me more, for the same experience i have with this card. (tho this argument falls bit short due to rt techology)

1070 was around 350, 2070 was around 480, that together is 830
1080ti was 800

Cost of ownership is higher when you have to upgrade every gen compared to buying higher stuff you can afford and having it last longer.

Edit: you could even upgrade yet again to 3070 and have 12% more performance compared to 1080ti for yet another 600 dollars on top. turning the total cost to 1450 and getting pretty much same experience as with 1080ti

 

[SpyderTracks]

i do get your point, but i disagree. Good example is 1080TI i have currently. yes it is 4 years old gpu, but it still can run anything really. Now buying 1070 and then 2070 would overall cost me more, for the same experience i have with this card. (tho this argument falls bit short due to rt techology)

1070 was around 350, 2070 was around 480, that together is 830
1080ti was 800

Cost of ownership is higher when you have to upgrade every gen compared to buying higher stuff you can afford and having it last longer.

That makes no sense, you’re saying for the sake of £30 you were happy to have a far worse graphical experience.

Some pc games are literally created as a showcase of what new technologies can do, most of the poor performers currently are those kinds of games. You’re not expected to run the at max settings, in fact it will reduce gaming fidelity in doing so, you’ll find small changes make very little visual difference but gain enormous FPS improvements.

All these games are made with the intention that they won’t be able to be maxxed out for years to come. The original Crysis was the first of these and it took 10 years before there was hardware capable of maxing it out:

10 years later, we can finally run Crysis

But as a performance analysis with 2017 hardware shows, it continues to punish even modern GPUs.

www.pcgamer.com

 

[loso64]

That makes no sense, you’re saying for the sake of £30 you were happy to have a far worse graphical experience.

Some pc games are literally created as a showcase of what new technologies can do, most of the poor performers currently are those kinds of games. You’re not expected to run the at max settings, in fact it will reduce gaming fidelity in doing so, you’ll find small changes make very little visual difference but gain enormous FPS improvements.

All these games are made with the intention that they won’t be able to be maxxed out for years to come. The original Crysis was the first of these and it took 10 years before there was hardware capable of maxing it out:

10 years later, we can finally run Crysis

But as a performance analysis with 2017 hardware shows, it continues to punish even modern GPUs.

www.pcgamer.com

pretty sure the experience with 1080ti on 3440x1440 is better than what 1070 and 2070 would give. It is only now that i have to start considering lowering settings or upgrade if i want the eye candy. If it was not for the RT cores, i would probably stick with this card for a while longer.

As for your argument with crysis, i would say that one is an exception. Most games that are made nowdays are made so you can max them out with good hardware. Crysis was made that no matter what hardware you had, was not possible to max it out.

 

[SpyderTracks]

As for your argument with crysis, i would say that one is an exception. Most games that are made nowdays are made so you can max them out with good hardware.

That’s just not true though, AAA titles are generally made exactly so that you CANT max them out on release as it leads to much better replayability and online lifetimes.

 

[loso64]

That’s just not true though, AAA titles are generally made exactly so that you CANT max them out on release as it leads to much better replayability and online lifetimes.

well yeah, if you only buy mid tier to low tier stuff instead of ever going for high tier. My 1080TI is still handling new games maxed out at high fps. Currently playing Days Gone, maxed settings, 3440x1440, 85FOV motion blur off at locked 60 fps

 

[SpyderTracks]

Games developers are able to explain this much better than I ever could, but there is no intention for anyone to run a new game maxxed out, unless it’s something like doom.

Judging game performance at "max settings" is enormously counterproductive

Performance at "max" settings, without context and deep understanding what these settings entail, is completely irrelevant for judging the technical quality of a game, and it's highly damaging how often it seems to be used to evaluate the same. I've wanted to make a thread about this for a...

www.neogaf.com

My 1080TI is still handling new games maxed out at high fps. Currently playing Days Gone, maxed settings, 3440x1440, 85FOV motion blur off at locked 60 fps

That’s my point entirely. To most gamers that frame rate is unacceptable.

 

[loso64]

Games developers are able to explain this much better than I ever could, but there is no intention for anyone to run a new game maxxed out, unless it’s something like doom.

Judging game performance at "max settings" is enormously counterproductive

Performance at "max" settings, without context and deep understanding what these settings entail, is completely irrelevant for judging the technical quality of a game, and it's highly damaging how often it seems to be used to evaluate the same. I've wanted to make a thread about this for a...

www.neogaf.com

That’s my point entirely. To most gamers that frame rate is unacceptable.

If we were going by your logic of buying mid tier. that would be progression from 1070 to 2070. So right now before upgrade i would have 2070 gpu instead of 1080TI. 2070 at this resolution gives less fps than 1080TI does.

2070

1080TI

Cost of ownership is higher if you have to regularly upgrade mid tier stuff. yes it is just stupid 30 dollars, but it still proves the point.

The 2070 would not have better performance in my games, i would still need upgrade. another mid tier, and then year later, another mid tier and again and again and again.

instead buying high tier every other gen, which has cost of ownership lower.

 

[loso64]

Lets agree to disagree. But i rather buy high end that i can afford currently, then rely on me having the option to upgrade mid tier every gen. If situation is bad, like current market or money issues. I can stretch high end older gear for much longer than a mid tier would last

 

[SpyderTracks]

Lets agree to disagree. But i rather buy high end that i can afford currently, then rely on me having the option to upgrade mid tier every gen. If situation is bad, like current market or money issues. I can stretch high end older gear for much longer than a mid tier would last

It may be fine for you, but when we advise people it’s with the masses and the fundamental understanding that optimising game settings offers a better experience than expecting to max out.

A blanket statement that a 3080 is best for 1440p just isn’t a healthy thing to say. That’s accurate for a tiny fraction of gamers.

 

[loso64]

It may be fine for you, but when we advise people it’s with the masses and the fundamental understanding that optimising game settings offers a better experience than expecting to max out.

A blanket statement that a 3080 is best for 1440p just isn’t a healthy thing to say. That’s accurate for a tiny fraction of gamers.

Masses also probably dont upgrade every gen either to keep the performance. They want pc that will last and dont have to worry about. So could still argue that buying as high as you can afford is better, especially as you said, optimizing settings is a thing

 

[Bigfoot]

The difference in cost in the above scenario is not £30, because you are ignoring the time value of money. £800 fours years ago is more expensive than £350 four years ago and the £480 a few years later. So periodically upgrading is cheaper and overall gives you better performance.

 

[SpyderTracks]

Masses also probably dont upgrade every gen either to keep the performance. They want pc that will last and dont have to worry about. So could still argue that buying as high as you can afford is better, especially as you said, optimizing settings is a thing

Yes, because they’re optimising settings so there’s no need to upgrade. They’re not expecting maxxed out graphics.

 

[loso64]

Yes, because they’re optimising settings so there’s no need to upgrade. They’re not expecting maxxed out graphics.

but if you suggest a gpu for someone with mind that they already have to optimize, than it wont last that way for long. Forcing upgrade early. As you said and i quote "To most gamers that frame rate is unacceptable." 60FPS is unacceptable. If they have to optimize with brand new pc to have higher fps. The fall of to the "unacceptable" range will happen so much faster

 

[SpyderTracks]

but if you suggest a gpu for someone with mind that they already have to optimize, than it wont last that way for long. Forcing upgrade early. As you said and i quote "To most gamers that frame rate is unacceptable." 60FPS is unacceptable. If they have to optimize with brand new pc to have higher fps. The fall of to the "unacceptable" range will happen so much faster

I take it you don’t understand what optimisation is? You’re kind of entirely missing what it does.

 

[Lemon_Haze]

Im goin repeat myself, people who saying 3080 is overkill probably has either 3070 and cant accept fact 3080 still run better on ' bad ' optimalised games. Who talking here on AAA titles with 130 fps? :d I wish i could get that, most games on 1440p with 5900X and 3070 cant compare to 3080 im talking between 80-130 fps not above this range, ive played myself on 5800 and 3070 and also on 3080 difference is big, who says something else dont be jealous cos you didnt get 3080 but please dont tell people 3070 is sufficient for 1440p cos its not. If you preffer play on reduced settings ok but dont try to confuse peope. turn on ray tracing and we back to 70+ fps at its best with aaa games. I understand price to performance ratio, but i rather buy best gpu now so i can play maxed out for few years rather then play on reduced settings. Why would i upgrade if i can stay with this gpu quite long? Dont forget ddr5 and new mobos coming out, no point of any update in future cos you will

Now eat me alive here is video with ' bad optimalised games

This is exact true refference what i can compare

 

[AgentCooper]

please dont tell people 3070 is sufficient for 1440p cos its not. If you preffer play on reduced settings ok but dont try to confuse peope.

Allow me to interject. I have a 3440x1440 144Hz monitor, a Ryzen 3800X CPU and an RTX 3070. I could’ve got a 3080 but didn’t because I choose to screen match my monitor to my GPU.

The first sentence in your statement above is, quite frankly, misinformation that borders on fake news territory. And the comment about ‘reduced settings’ is also ill informed. Having a 3080 doesn’t unlock some magical door where graphical secrets are kept and shown only to the the wise ones. It merely allows some assets to run at a higher level. Those assets are ones related to detail levels that actually make very little difference to things happening on screen but will eat into frame rates.

I can comfortably get 100-120 frames per second on top end titles such Red Dead Redemption 2 and Metro Exodus with fantastic visuals. It’s easily achieved by changing a couple of settings that the untrained eye wouldn’t even notice, such as particle quality, reflection quality, soft shadows etc. Drop them to medium and boom, your frame rate goes up exponentially.

And for the record, even a well trained eye isn’t going to be missing those details when they’re actually playing and focused on the game.

Chasing ultra settings and being maxed out across the board on modern and AAA titles is a mugs game. Part of being a PC owner/gamer is knowing how to optimise properly.

Now I wouldn’t stop anyone buying a 3080 to match with their 2560x1440 screen. But I would tell them that they’re wasting money that could be better spent elsewhere.

 

[jamiephillips909]

Im goin repeat myself, people who saying 3080 is overkill probably has either 3070 and cant accept fact 3080 still run better on ' bad ' optimalised games. Who talking here on AAA titles with 130 fps? :d I wish i could get that, most games on 1440p with 5900X and 3070 cant compare to 3080 im talking between 80-130 fps not above this range, ive played myself on 5800 and 3070 and also on 3080 difference is big, who says something else dont be jealous cos you didnt get 3080 but please dont tell people 3070 is sufficient for 1440p cos its not. If you preffer play on reduced settings ok but dont try to confuse peope. turn on ray tracing and we back to 70+ fps at its best with aaa games. I understand price to performance ratio, but i rather buy best gpu now so i can play maxed out for few years rather then play on reduced settings. Why would i upgrade if i can stay with this gpu quite long? Dont forget ddr5 and new mobos coming out, no point of any update in future cos you will

Now eat me alive here is video with ' bad optimalised games

This is exact true refference what i can compare

This is my point with complete respect to you you have posted a youtube video with some gameplay showing a overlay with under 2k views and under 20 likes this isnt gamer nexus or linus tech tips its a crappy benchmark channel that is more then likely fake 0 subscribers but can get hold of a 3070 a 3080 and a 3090 and benchmark them ...... if its to good to be true .....