Overclock.net › Forums › Graphics Cards › NVIDIA › [Official] NVIDIA Titan X Pascal Owners Thread
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

[Official] NVIDIA Titan X Pascal Owners Thread - Page 322

post #3211 of 7609
I still think people are prematurely making the jump to 4K. 144Hz+ 1440p is where it's at right now as that is all you can expect to get with current generation technology if you like maxing out your games. Higher pixel density shows additional detail. But lower refresh rates make seeing that detail hard to see when there's motion of any kind.

Too many people don't understand how different a game feels when you're playing with 165Hz GSYNC. Everything is just so buttery smooth and responsive that you feel a connection to the game world.
post #3212 of 7609
Quote:
Originally Posted by HyperMatrix View Post

I still think people are prematurely making the jump to 4K. 144Hz+ 1440p is where it's at right now as that is all you can expect to get with current generation technology if you like maxing out your games. Higher pixel density shows additional detail. But lower refresh rates make seeing that detail hard to see when there's motion of any kind.

Too many people don't understand how different a game feels when you're playing with 165Hz GSYNC. Everything is just so buttery smooth and responsive that you feel a connection to the game world.
Too many people don't know that G-Sync is capped at 144Hz. Going over that actually defeats the purpose of G-sync in the first place.
post #3213 of 7609
Quote:
Originally Posted by mouacyk View Post

Too many people don't know that G-Sync is capped at 144Hz. Going over that actually defeats the purpose of G-sync in the first place.

Too many people don't know that GSYNC on a 165Hz monitor is capped at 165Hz. And that's why you set an fps cap 5fps below the GSYNC cap so it's always active.
post #3214 of 7609
Quote:
Originally Posted by HyperMatrix View Post

Too many people don't know that GSYNC on a 165Hz monitor is capped at 165Hz. And that's why you set an fps cap 5fps below the GSYNC cap so it's always active.
Proof plz. Tftcentral seems to be outdated. 165hz isn't official either. It's in overclock mode.
Edited by mouacyk - 8/25/16 at 2:25pm
post #3215 of 7609
Quote:
Originally Posted by HyperMatrix View Post

I still think people are prematurely making the jump to 4K. 144Hz+ 1440p is where it's at right now as that is all you can expect to get with current generation technology if you like maxing out your games. Higher pixel density shows additional detail. But lower refresh rates make seeing that detail hard to see when there's motion of any kind.

Too many people don't understand how different a game feels when you're playing with 165Hz GSYNC. Everything is just so buttery smooth and responsive that you feel a connection to the game world.

In my opinion it depends on the games played really, if it's games like Skyrim, the witcher, fallout, dragonage, etc. etc. then 4k 60 fps is just fine since there isn't a lot of fast movement to disturb things. If it's racing or fps type games with a lot of quick movements, then I totally agree, the added fps really helps a lot more than the higher pixel density.

The 3440x1440 100hz monitors are a nice half way meeting point between the two I think.
Quote:
Originally Posted by HyperMatrix View Post

Too many people don't know that GSYNC on a 165Hz monitor is capped at 165Hz. And that's why you set an fps cap 5fps below the GSYNC cap so it's always active.

If you are running a fairly steady 165 fps, what point is there to GSYNC?

edit, as in who cares if Gsync quits working when you are above 160 fps as long as it kicks back in when you drop below it.
Edited by DNMock - 8/25/16 at 2:30pm
post #3216 of 7609
Quote:
Originally Posted by DNMock View Post

In my opinion it depends on the games played really, if it's games like Skyrim, the witcher, fallout, dragonage, etc. etc. then 4k 60 fps is just fine since there isn't a lot of fast movement to disturb things. If it's racing or fps type games with a lot of quick movements, then I totally agree, the added fps really helps a lot more than the higher pixel density.

The 3440x1440 100hz monitors are a nice half way meeting point between the two I think.
Bingo. I love the extra fov also. Took bad light boost is not available. 100hz light boost is acceptable.
post #3217 of 7609
Quote:
Originally Posted by mouacyk View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by HyperMatrix View Post

I still think people are prematurely making the jump to 4K. 144Hz+ 1440p is where it's at right now as that is all you can expect to get with current generation technology if you like maxing out your games. Higher pixel density shows additional detail. But lower refresh rates make seeing that detail hard to see when there's motion of any kind.

Too many people don't understand how different a game feels when you're playing with 165Hz GSYNC. Everything is just so buttery smooth and responsive that you feel a connection to the game world.
Too many people don't know that G-Sync is capped at 144Hz. Going over that actually defeats the purpose of G-sync in the first place.

It's only premature if you need 100± fps. Personally, I think the demand for passing everything at >144hz speeds is ridiculous... And I have a RoG Swift. But then my refresh rate needs aren't what others' are, so I won't judge.

Seriously, I get 60 fps on just about every game I play with max or very-close-to max settings, and I've pretty much transitioned to playing everything at 4k. My RoG Swift is basically just a supplemental screen at this point.

Sent from my XT1575 using Tapatalk
post #3218 of 7609
I'm building a new computer for VR and 4k gaming. I shouldn't say 4k more like 2560x1440p with using super sampling a little bit. But I'm looking at either a titan x (pascal) or a gtx 1080. Price isnt a bother and I'm just running a single card.
post #3219 of 7609
Quote:
Originally Posted by DNMock View Post

If you are running a fairly steady 165 fps, what point is there to GSYNC?

edit, as in who cares if Gsync quits working when you are above 160 fps as long as it kicks back in when you drop below it.

It helps when the fps fluctuates. If I 160fps guaranteed/locked down FPS in games all the time, I'd be a happy camper. But that's not possible with 2 Titans, unfortunately. GSYNC also reduces input lag. vsync-off at 165Hz/165fps still has higher input lag than 165Hz GSYNC with a 160fps cap since Gsync matches every frame generated to a screen refresh.

Quote:
Originally Posted by mouacyk View Post

Proof plz. Tftcentral seems to be outdated. 165hz isn't official either. It's in overclock mode.

Looks like we have another contrarian in our midst. Mentioning tftcentral, then ignoring that TFT central clearly lists

"Refresh Rate
144Hz native
Up to 165z max overclocked
G-sync range 30 - 165Hz"
post #3220 of 7609
Quote:
Originally Posted by Neon01 View Post

It's only premature if you need 100± fps. Personally, I think the demand for passing everything at >144hz speeds is ridiculous... And I have a RoG Swift. But then my refresh rate needs aren't what others' are, so I won't judge.

Seriously, I get 60 fps on just about every game I play with max or very-close-to max settings, and I've pretty much transitioned to playing everything at 4k. My RoG Swift is basically just a supplemental screen at this point.

Sent from my XT1575 using Tapatalk

Only way I could imagine doing 60Hz is if it were on Plasma or OLED. LCD at 60Hz is just painful to watch. It's like when I try watching a hockey game at a bar or at a friend's place on their LCD. It's just painful, unless they're using interpolated 120/240hz simulation, which is really just a hack fix. Also lower refresh rate is fine for some games. Like I could play Witcher 3 at 80fps and be a happy camper. Not sure I'd be able to do 60. But still, for me to admit to being able to play any time at 80fps, it's saying a lot. The higher refresh matters more for games where input lag/responsiveness is important. For example in an FPS game, a higher refresh rate will actually increase your KDR. The more physical distance pixels have to move on screen, the more you will see a benefit from high refresh rates. But if you're playing Diablo 3 for example, where it's top down and there's not a lot of pixel movement, the way you have in an FPS when you do a 180, for example, then you can generally get by. So I think a lot of it depends on the type of games you play.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: NVIDIA
Overclock.net › Forums › Graphics Cards › NVIDIA › [Official] NVIDIA Titan X Pascal Owners Thread