Recommended Monitor for a Gtx 1070

[Wakobi Junior]

Right now I have a 1080p 60hz 27" monitor
I'm pretty satisfied with both the resolution and the frame but for competitive I think it's better I go for a higher frame rate especially when my graphics card is capable of it.

Should I get a higher refresh rate but stick to 1080p or a higher resolution? Any recommendations? I would want a 27" + size or ultra wide? Never tried that

[DefinitelyNotMonk]

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย TheDude:

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย Infinity Josh:

Actually you need at least a GTX 1080 to benefit of a high frame rate on a 1440p, it's much expensive...

My GTX 970 pushs my 1440p/165hz Acer just fine.

Not anywhere near 144 at max settings it doesn't unless it's an e-sport game.

[DefinitelyNotMonk]

Which is the poster child for e-sport games and runs at hundreds of FPS on a potato, so I kind of already covered that part :) try something like wildlands or pubg at max settings and it will be crawling sadly.

[InfinityJosh]

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย TheDude:

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย DefinitelyNotMonk:

Not anywhere near 144 at max settings it doesn't unless it's an e-sport game.

I don't play new AAA games. But have no problem with max settings in CSGO. And I use 165hz.

CS:GO runs on potatoes.

[DefinitelyNotMonk]

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย TheDude:

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย DefinitelyNotMonk:

Which is the poster child for e-sport games and runs at hundreds of FPS on a potato, so I kind of already covered that part :) try something like wildlands or pubg at max settings and it will be crawling sadly.

Yep. There is a 1080 ti in my future. Budget in place but have to get it past the boss (I'm trying to convince her that my old 970 will fit nicely in her rig so she doesn't need a 1080 ti).

Lol good luck with that, I fear you'll need it :)

[Sandman]

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย EliteGamer:

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย Sandman:

1080p is a thing of the past man.

I have a GTX 1070 and I have the 27" 1440p 144Hz G-sync Asus monitor. It's fantastic.

It's a pity a 1070 won't get anywhere near 144 fps at ultra settings, even on a old game like GTA 5 lol. You would of been better getting a 1080p 144hz+ monitor, you would of got the max out of the monitor and got your money's worth.....Instead, you've wasted money on a 1440p 144hz monitor.

I don't need ultra settings. I go off of high res, high frames, and medium to high settings.

I haven't wasted any money. This monitor will be good for years. I got my value out of it day 1 with BF4 at 130fps on high settings and then 90 fps with BF1 on medium to high depending on the map. All at 1440p.

I'd much rather have 100 fps and 1440p on medium than 1080p 60fps on ultra. That's my taste.

[EliteGamer]

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย Sandman:

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย EliteGamer:

It's a pity a 1070 won't get anywhere near 144 fps at ultra settings, even on a old game like GTA 5 lol. You would of been better getting a 1080p 144hz+ monitor, you would of got the max out of the monitor and got your money's worth.....Instead, you've wasted money on a 1440p 144hz monitor.

I don't need ultra settings. I go off of high res, high frames, and medium to high settings.

I haven't wasted any money. This monitor will be good for years. I got my value out of it day 1 with BF4 at 130fps on high settings and then 90 fps with BF1 on medium to high depending on the map. All at 1440p.

I'd much rather have 100 fps and 1440p on medium than 1080p 60fps on ultra. That's my taste.

Medium settings? Damn, that sucks. What's the point in that? 1080p @ ultra settings @ 180 fps is better than 1440p at low - medium settings @ 90 fps.... especially if you like shooters. CSGO at 160 fps + is ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ awesome. I even prefer to play that game at 1080p than I do 4K.

High resolution has its place, I have a 4K monitor and it's awesome image quality, but shooters are best played at 144hz+.

[Wakobi Junior]

So no one recommends ultra wide? Those look cool

[DefinitelyNotMonk]

Well,refresh beats resolution for the most part, and good ultra sides are 3440x1440 and 100Hz, however, that's asking a bit much of a 1070, add in the limited support for ultrawides (though it works most of the time now) and the high expense, means they don't seem like a good fit.

[oobymach]

So what I'm hearing is that nobody else here uses DSR? I dsr 4k on a 1080p monitor @ 144hz and games look and play amazingly. I also have sli 1070's so that doesn't hurt on getting loads of fps in every game.

Nvidia global 3d settings, enable dsr 4x with 22% smoothness.

A 1080p monitor looks dated when you display only raw 1080p with no aa, when running 4k dsr 2160p (or 8k 4320p if you do taa anti aliasing on a 4k image which is the best image you can possibly display atm) games look immaculate and with taa you don't see any jaggies anywhere though it costs some fps to play 4k dsr with taa.

I also own a 4k monitor but it only does 1ms 60hz and has bad positive ghosting so gaming isn't great compared with a 144hz 1ms 1080p displaying 2160p dsr in a game. I'm waiting now on a 4k 120hz monitor with 10bit color, 1440p 144hz isn't enough for me to buy another monitor.

[EliteGamer]

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย oobymach:

So what I'm hearing is that nobody else here uses DSR? I dsr 4k on a 1080p monitor @ 144hz and games look and play amazingly. I also have sli 1070's so that doesn't hurt on getting loads of fps in every game.

Nvidia global 3d settings, enable dsr 4x with 22% smoothness.

A 1080p monitor looks dated when you display only raw 1080p with no aa, when running 4k dsr 2160p (or 8k 4320p if you do taa anti aliasing on a 4k image which is the best image you can possibly display atm) games look immaculate and with taa you don't see any jaggies anywhere though it costs some fps to play 4k dsr with taa.

I also own a 4k monitor but it only does 1ms 60hz and has bad positive ghosting so gaming isn't great compared with a 144hz 1ms 1080p displaying 2160p dsr in a game. I'm waiting now on a 4k 120hz monitor with 10bit color, 1440p 144hz isn't enough for me to buy another monitor.

You must own a cheap chinese 4K monitor if you have bad ghosting.... There's no ghosting on my high end top of the range 4K gaming G-SYNC monitor.

Not all 4K monitors are created equal. You get what you pay for....

Also, my 4K monitor is 10 bit color, but you can't use 10 bit color with GPU's like a 1080 Ti....

My next 4K monitor will be Asus ROG Swift PG27UQ...... 4K , 144hz, HDR, G-SYNC..... Money's no object here ;)

[Sandman]

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย EliteGamer:

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย Sandman:

I don't need ultra settings. I go off of high res, high frames, and medium to high settings.

I haven't wasted any money. This monitor will be good for years. I got my value out of it day 1 with BF4 at 130fps on high settings and then 90 fps with BF1 on medium to high depending on the map. All at 1440p.

I'd much rather have 100 fps and 1440p on medium than 1080p 60fps on ultra. That's my taste.

Medium settings? Damn, that sucks. What's the point in that? 1080p @ ultra settings @ 180 fps is better than 1440p at low - medium settings @ 90 fps

Not to me. The difference in visual quality to me between high and ultra is so minor I don't even notice. But I do notice 1440p and 1080p. I can also notice 60fps and 100 fps. So based on my priorities and my experience, I chose the screen I did and I'm very happy with it. It's been over a year.

But then again I'm not a "gamer." So I don't "compete." I have a day job. I just play to relax and kill time. 100fps is ok with me. 144fps is great, but if I can get above that 80-90 range that's when I can really notice.

By the way, I also use IPS panels and not TN. IPS looks a hell of a lot better, and again, since I don't compete, I don't care about TN response time.

[Astro_80 (WASH YOUR HANDS!)]

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย Ugnak:

Right now I have a 1080p 60hz 27" monitor
I'm pretty satisfied with both the resolution and the frame but for competitive I think it's better I go for a higher frame rate especially when my graphics card is capable of it.

Should I get a higher refresh rate but stick to 1080p or a higher resolution? Any recommendations? I would want a 27" + size or ultra wide? Never tried that

You aren't doing that GPU any justice by running it with 1080p. 1440p is what you should aim for. Don't bother with 4K.

[InfinityJosh]

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย Sandman:

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย EliteGamer:

Medium settings? Damn, that sucks. What's the point in that? 1080p @ ultra settings @ 180 fps is better than 1440p at low - medium settings @ 90 fps

Not to me. The difference in visual quality to me between high and ultra is so minor I don't even notice. But I do notice 1440p and 1080p. I can also notice 60fps and 100 fps. So based on my priorities and my experience, I chose the screen I did and I'm very happy with it. It's been over a year.

But then again I'm not a "gamer." So I don't "compete." I have a day job. I just play to relax and kill time. 100fps is ok with me. 144fps is great, but if I can get above that 80-90 range that's when I can really notice.

By the way, I also use IPS panels and not TN. IPS looks a hell of a lot better, and again, since I don't compete, I don't care about TN response time.

TN is terrible for image quality but you can go with VA, which is really good in contrast and it isn't a useless detail.
IPS has overall better quality but VA contrast is better.
Also yes 1440p is better than 1080p but is too expensive today to play if you plan to purchase a GPU for few years considering the dwindling performance over the years.

[DefinitelyNotMonk]

Honestly I prefer the image on my high end TN panel over my cheap IPS ones I got recently (1440p asus rog swift Vs fairly generic 1080p Asus IPS panels), could be I am just used to it, and it is a high end TN panel Vs the cheap IPS ones, but I don't see the massive oh wow difference some go on about with IPS over TN.

[Sandman]

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย DefinitelyNotMonk:

Honestly I prefer the image on my high end TN panel over my cheap IPS ones I got recently (1440p asus rog swift Vs fairly generic 1080p Asus IPS panels), could be I am just used to it, and it is a high end TN panel Vs the cheap IPS ones, but I don't see the massive oh wow difference some go on about with IPS over TN.

If you compare a good TN with a good IPS, you see a big difference. Yeah, if you find the best TN on the market and compare it with a crap IPS, then the difference minimizes. But we both know that's not an accurate and fair comparison. There's a reason IPS costs about $150 - $200 more on a 27 inch screen.