Overclock.net › Forums › Components › Monitors and Displays ›  what is the better choice 1440p or 144hz?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

what is the better choice 1440p or 144hz? - Page 2

Poll Results: what is the better choice 1440p or 144hz

 
  • 38% (10)
    1080p 144hz
  • 61% (16)
    1440p 60hz
26 Total Votes  
post #11 of 84
Quote:
Originally Posted by Klocek001 View Post

If you spent that money for 6600K and GTX 980 that'd be a lot better, you could try 1440p and g-sync with higher refresh rate, I'd smoke 5820k/390 out of the water.

I wouldnt suggest upgrading a 5820k for an I5. I know it will clock at bit higher and have a little better IPC and RAM speed maybe, but I bet its not going to make a difference you would notice
post #12 of 84
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Klocek001 View Post

If you spent that money for 6600K and GTX 980 that'd be a lot better, you could try 1440p and g-sync with higher refresh rate, I'd smoke 5820k/390 out of the water.
A 5820k is way better a 6600k especially with a oc and the extra cores. Im not only gaming.
The 390 is temp for a year till next gen is fully out and rated and everything.
post #13 of 84
Quote:
Originally Posted by SoccerNinja View Post

A 5820k is way better a 6600k especially with a oc and the extra cores. Im not only gaming.
The 390 is temp for a year till next gen is fully out and rated and everything.
yeah I'm not questioning that, I just said 6600k + 980 would run faster in games than 5820k + 390.
Well, if you are planning to keep upgrading your rig then maybe go with MG279Q now, freesync would help smooth out the fps drops if 390 lacks power @1440p. Then you can get a new card that'd be able to run at max freesync rate of this monitor,which is 90Hz IIRC.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Slink3Slyde View Post

I wouldnt suggest upgrading a 5820k for an I5. I know it will clock at bit higher and have a little better IPC and RAM speed maybe, but I bet its not going to make a difference you would notice
5820k -> 6600k would be a big downgrade, not an upgrade.
Edited by Klocek001 - 2/4/16 at 9:53am
post #14 of 84
Quote:
Originally Posted by Klocek001 View Post

yeah I'm not questioning that, I just said 6600k + 980 would run faster in games than 5820k + 390.
Well, if you are planning to keep upgrading your rig then maybe go with MG279Q now, freesync would help smooth out the fps drops if 390 lacks power @1440p. Then you can get a new card that'd be able to run at max freesync rate of this monitor,which is 90Hz IIRC.
5820k -> 6600k would be a big downgrade, not an upgrade.

For gaming? Probably actually a slight upgrade consdering it would clock higher with a slightly better memory controller and games hardly use more then 4 cores.. Worth it, no.
post #15 of 84
Quote:
Originally Posted by Slink3Slyde View Post

For gaming? Probably actually a slight upgrade consdering it would clock higher with a slightly better memory controller and games hardly use more then 4 cores.. Worth it, no.
they do. I went from i5 (3570k) to i7 (4790k) and the load on cores is totally different, every major aaa title in 2015 could use all 8 threads nicely. we're talking 12t vs 4t here.
Edited by Klocek001 - 2/4/16 at 10:08am
post #16 of 84
1920x108. has 2MP And 2560x144. has 3.68MP
If you wanted to achieve high fps rate 1080 should be easier and a 390 would get a framerate above 45-50,meanwhile 1440 would have a lower framerate bith maxed
post #17 of 84
1440p at 60Hz is about the same difficulty as 1080p 144Hz for the GPU, but 1440p 60Hz is much easier for the CPU since resolution doesn't affect CPU load. So at 1440p 60Hz the CPU only has to be capable of getting 60fps, whereas 1080p 144Hz, the load on the CPU is exactly the same, but it has to be capable of getting 144fps now. So 1080p 144Hz is "harder" in that sense as you're more likely to be limited by your CPU. But for the graphics card it's about the same.
Edited by Glenwing - 2/4/16 at 5:09pm
Number Five
(15 items)
 
   
CPUMotherboardGraphicsGraphics
Intel Core i7-3930K GIGABYTE GA-X79-UP4 NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780 Ti NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780 Ti 
RAMRAMHard DriveHard Drive
Samsung Green DDR3 Corsair XMS3 DDR3 Seagate 600 SSD Crucial MX100 SSD 
CoolingMonitorMonitorMonitor
Corsair Hydro Series H80i Dell UltraSharp U2414H Dell UltraSharp U2414H Dell UltraSharp U2415 
MonitorPowerCase
ASUS ProArt PA248Q Corsair RM1000i Phanteks Enthoo Luxe 
CPUGraphicsRAMHard Drive
Intel Core i5-2520M Intel HD Graphics 3000 DDR3 Seagate 600 SSD 
Hard DriveMonitor
Samsung SSD 840 PRO 1600x900 TN Laptop Display 
  hide details  
Reply
Number Five
(15 items)
 
   
CPUMotherboardGraphicsGraphics
Intel Core i7-3930K GIGABYTE GA-X79-UP4 NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780 Ti NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780 Ti 
RAMRAMHard DriveHard Drive
Samsung Green DDR3 Corsair XMS3 DDR3 Seagate 600 SSD Crucial MX100 SSD 
CoolingMonitorMonitorMonitor
Corsair Hydro Series H80i Dell UltraSharp U2414H Dell UltraSharp U2414H Dell UltraSharp U2415 
MonitorPowerCase
ASUS ProArt PA248Q Corsair RM1000i Phanteks Enthoo Luxe 
CPUGraphicsRAMHard Drive
Intel Core i5-2520M Intel HD Graphics 3000 DDR3 Seagate 600 SSD 
Hard DriveMonitor
Samsung SSD 840 PRO 1600x900 TN Laptop Display 
  hide details  
Reply
post #18 of 84
Quote:
Originally Posted by Klocek001 View Post

they do. I went from i5 (3570k) to i7 (4790k) and the load on cores is totally different, every major aaa title in 2015 could use all 8 threads nicely. we're talking 12t vs 4t here.

Just going by the testing I saw recently here.

http://www.overclock.net/t/1588555/gaming-benchmarks-skylake-core-i7-hyperthreading-test

Some of the games arent all that recent, he does have Witcher 3 in there. I'm not going to claim theres no games that benefit from more threads because I know there's some, but I think a majority of games actually see no benefit from more then 4 cores, some get a slight bump others are actually hurt by HT. The guy did the same test with a 3770 as well, but I cant find it now.

I'm not really all that bothered TBH. I've been trying to convince myself not to buy one myself and wait and see what Broadwell-E or Zen has to offer later in the year, but Ive had my 3570k for 3 and a bit years now, I want to play with something new.
post #19 of 84
Quote:
Originally Posted by SoccerNinja View Post

Like the title says, would it be easier to run 1080p at 144 frames or 1440p at 60 frames?

I guess there's no such thing as a stupid question, just stupid answers (even though I'm not a fan of this question's logic)
But ASSUMING that a 1920x1080p monitor could get NO HIGHER than 144 FPS with vsync off, and would average 144 FPS with a fixed CPU load and you were 100% purely video FILLRATE limited (taking the CPU out of the picture), then 1920x1080@144 FPS would be "about" equal to 2560x1440@90 fps
SB Rig
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7-2600k Gigabyte P67A-UD5 B3 R9 290X 16GB 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
WD 2 TB, WD 1 TB, 250gb Liteon ihbs212 blu-ray burner/reader XP+W7 Benq XL2720Z 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Ducky Shine 69/Year of the Goat/Shine 5 Seasonic Platinum X1000 Corsair 760T Logitech G502 with r0ach approved ™ sensor 
Mouse Pad
Puretrak Talent 
  hide details  
Reply
SB Rig
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7-2600k Gigabyte P67A-UD5 B3 R9 290X 16GB 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
WD 2 TB, WD 1 TB, 250gb Liteon ihbs212 blu-ray burner/reader XP+W7 Benq XL2720Z 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Ducky Shine 69/Year of the Goat/Shine 5 Seasonic Platinum X1000 Corsair 760T Logitech G502 with r0ach approved ™ sensor 
Mouse Pad
Puretrak Talent 
  hide details  
Reply
post #20 of 84
Quote:
Originally Posted by Slink3Slyde View Post

Just going by the testing I saw recently here.

http://www.overclock.net/t/1588555/gaming-benchmarks-skylake-core-i7-hyperthreading-test

Some of the games arent all that recent, he does have Witcher 3 in there. I'm not going to claim theres no games that benefit from more threads because I know there's some, but I think a majority of games actually see no benefit from more then 4 cores, some get a slight bump others are actually hurt by HT. The guy did the same test with a 3770 as well, but I cant find it now.

I'm not really all that bothered TBH. I've been trying to convince myself not to buy one myself and wait and see what Broadwell-E or Zen has to offer later in the year, but Ive had my 3570k for 3 and a bit years now, I want to play with something new.
witcher 3 is the only new title in there, most of them are 2-3 years old, some even older. he gets around 65 fps on 6700k in witcher,which suggests a gpu bottleneck cause even my 4790K is capable of avg framerate around 90 fps @1440p if I don't use everything on ultra.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Monitors and Displays
Overclock.net › Forums › Components › Monitors and Displays ›  what is the better choice 1440p or 144hz?