5700xt for 4K gaming?

[Moonvalley]

Thinking of getting a 4K monitor and a new gpu (currently using an RX 580)

i do not really play the latest games these days (lack of interest/they are usually broken messes at launch)

Probably be playing Fallout 76, Anime JRPG games and other like minded games.

So the 5700xt or a RTX 2070 Super?

i can get a 5700xt used on amazon for 370$ or a new 2070 super for around 550$ new on amazon.

[xSOSxHawkens]

引用自 Aquafawks：

引用自 xSOSxHawkens：

Aquafawks I am asking you *specifically* in your personal viewpoint, in *any game that natively includes it* is it EVER acceptable to not run totally maxxexd AA?...

That's difficult to answer and it's why I was intentionally trying to avoid it. It also boils down to the user and their experience, and the game we're playing. Some people are comfortable with AA off and some people are not. Some games don't show any discernable difference in anti-aliasing on or off. Some games with AA off look incredibly disgusting with horrible jaggies everywhere, even at 4K. But some games are perfectly fine with AA off in 4K, or 1440P, or anything else. It's an widely varied subject. Some games I won't play them without AA on. Some games I play with AA off. Some games I play with AA off and resolution scaling maxed out for 4K/8K. Some games I can't stomach even seeing them without AA on or maxed out. It depends on the game. I also have terrible eyes and have to wear thick glasses to see anything so it may be my eyes are bad. I can't give you a definitive yes or no answer to that.

I also did not specifically say that you, or me, or the OP would have to play games at all max settings either. I chose my words carefully. You did not read exactly what I wrote. Please go back and re-read my words. I specifically said "Some people" may not be comfortable with turning some graphics settings off. You are okay with it. I'm okay with it in some games. Most games I prefer to play them with all settings maxed out though if possible. But sometimes I may turn some settings off in some games, it depends on the game. Like I play with a few settings off/down in ARK: Survival Evolved because my single water cooled and overclocked 1080 Ti isn't powerful enough for 60 FPS otherwise but I love the game. That's the only game I ever turn stuff down or off in.

In the games I enjoy playing I have taken my computer to a friend's house and hooked it up with his 4K screen and tried to play games on it. The level of settings I would have to turn off and/or down just to make 4K work (in the games I enjoy playing) at 60 FPS just makes the games look so terrible that it's not even worth playing in 4K, to me. And I have a video card comparable in performance to the 5700 XT.

I just thought that the OP should be made aware of it is all. If they play games in 4K they may end up having to play some of their favorite games all the way down at low / very low settings just for 60 FPS in 4K. Personally I'm not going to spend $700 on a video card to play games in low settings. But that's just me and my opinions.

What games do you play that had to have their settings turned down so low as to have a major negative impact on quality just to run 4K on something comparable to a 5700XT?...

I mean... modern Far Crys, Crysis's, Metro's, Battlefields, Bathesda titles, Call of Duty's, All popular F2P, E-Sports and BR games, modern CIV and Anno tittles, Borderlands's, Outerworlds, Monster Hunter World, GTA, Killing Floor 2, The Forrest, R6S...

I cant think of a game I have to drop any lower than mostly high with a couple select mediums, and most I get even better than that.

Serisouly, what title do you play that you have had this issue?...

I mean, I get what you are saying to an extent, but to have anything in the 1080/Vega64/2070/5700xt or greater range and struggle to run 4K at reasonable settings seems odd to me...

Even in such a case, just pull the old NV trick and use some form of low load AA combined with downscaling al-la fake DLSS. In side by side testing with still image capture using something like traditional 2x AA with ~75% rez, or something like TAA with a decent 70-80% rez scale will produce similar quality and similar FPS to first generation DLSS...

[🦊Λℚ𝓤ΛƑΛᗯҜᔕ🦊]

引用自 xSOSxHawkens：

What games do you play that had to have their settings turned down so low as to have a major negative impact on quality just to run 4K on something comparable to a 5700XT?...

I mean... modern Far Crys, Crysis's, Metro's, Battlefields, Bathesda titles, Call of Duty's, All popular F2P, E-Sports and BR games, modern CIV and Anno tittles, Borderlands's, Outerworlds, Monster Hunter World, GTA, Killing Floor 2, The Forrest, R6S...

I cant think of a game I have to drop any lower than mostly high with a couple select mediums, and most I get even better than that.

Serisouly, what title do you play that you have had this issue?...

I mean, I get what you are saying to an extent, but to have anything in the 1080/Vega64/2070/5700xt or greater range and struggle to run 4K at reasonable settings seems odd to me...

Borderlands 3. I normally play it at home on a 1080p screen that can do 120hz and Normally I can run it in DirectX-12 mode and run it at a steady 120 FPS at all times on max settings in-game, only dipping down in to the mid to low 70's in some combat scenes, but never below 60. I connected it to my friend's 4K screen and loaded the game and it was instantly 18-22 FPS. I started turning off graphics settings trying to get it to run right and I had almost everything turned off and finally got it to run around mid-50's FPS. Also ARK: Survival Evolved is terrible in 4K. I had to turn almost all settings off to minimum except view distance just to get 60 FPS @ 4K in ARK. I also play american truck sim with a lot of community modded trailers and cargo and have one mod where it makes community modded trailers and cargo spawn for the in-traffic trucks we see driving around and I can run that at 1080p max settings (Except resolution scaling off) at 80~120 FPS (80's minimums in cities) at home. But at 4K I had to drop almost everything down/off just to get 60 FPS. It looked terrible. In my personal opinion 4K is not viable / way too much of a sacrifice to have playable frame rate. I would much rather play at 1080p with high refresh rate with all the pretty effects maxed out personally.

And before you ask about my computer, it's a Ryzen 5 2600, overclocked @ 4.2 Ghz all-core with 16GB DDR4 @ 3533 Mhz @ 16-16-16. And windows 10 64-bit. I might have a better time of it if I had a 9900K or a Ryzen 3900X system. That may be a factor into it but I don't know if it would make that big of a difference. 4K stuff is usually graphics card limiting, not so much system limiting.

[Moonvalley]

引用自 Aquafawks：

引用自 xSOSxHawkens：

What games do you play that had to have their settings turned down so low as to have a major negative impact on quality just to run 4K on something comparable to a 5700XT?...

I mean... modern Far Crys, Crysis's, Metro's, Battlefields, Bathesda titles, Call of Duty's, All popular F2P, E-Sports and BR games, modern CIV and Anno tittles, Borderlands's, Outerworlds, Monster Hunter World, GTA, Killing Floor 2, The Forrest, R6S...

I cant think of a game I have to drop any lower than mostly high with a couple select mediums, and most I get even better than that.

Serisouly, what title do you play that you have had this issue?...

I mean, I get what you are saying to an extent, but to have anything in the 1080/Vega64/2070/5700xt or greater range and struggle to run 4K at reasonable settings seems odd to me...

Borderlands 3. I normally play it at home on a 1080p screen that can do 120hz and Normally I can run it in DirectX-12 mode and run it at a steady 120 FPS at all times on max settings in-game, only dipping down in to the mid to low 70's in some combat scenes, but never below 60. I connected it to my friend's 4K screen and loaded the game and it was instantly 18-22 FPS. I started turning off graphics settings trying to get it to run right and I had almost everything turned off and finally got it to run around mid-50's FPS. Also ARK: Survival Evolved is terrible in 4K. I had to turn almost all settings off to minimum except view distance just to get 60 FPS @ 4K in ARK. I also play american truck sim with a lot of community modded trailers and cargo and have one mod where it makes community modded trailers and cargo spawn for the in-traffic trucks we see driving around and I can run that at 1080p max settings (Except resolution scaling off) at 80~120 FPS (80's minimums in cities) at home. But at 4K I had to drop almost everything down/off just to get 60 FPS. It looked terrible. In my personal opinion 4K is not viable / way too much of a sacrifice to have playable frame rate. I would much rather play at 1080p with high refresh rate with all the pretty effects maxed out personally.

And before you ask about my computer, it's a Ryzen 5 2600, overclocked @ 4.2 Ghz all-core with 16GB DDR4 @ 3533 Mhz @ 16-16-16. I might have a better time of it if I had a 9900K or a Ryzen 3900X system. And windows 10 64-bit. That may be a factor into it but I don't know if it would make that big of a difference. 4K stuff is usually graphics card limiting, not so much system limiting.

We have the same cpu :D

[xSOSxHawkens]

引用自 Aquafawks：

引用自 xSOSxHawkens：

What games do you play that had to have their settings turned down so low as to have a major negative impact on quality just to run 4K on something comparable to a 5700XT?...

I mean... modern Far Crys, Crysis's, Metro's, Battlefields, Bathesda titles, Call of Duty's, All popular F2P, E-Sports and BR games, modern CIV and Anno tittles, Borderlands's, Outerworlds, Monster Hunter World, GTA, Killing Floor 2, The Forrest, R6S...

I cant think of a game I have to drop any lower than mostly high with a couple select mediums, and most I get even better than that.

Serisouly, what title do you play that you have had this issue?...

I mean, I get what you are saying to an extent, but to have anything in the 1080/Vega64/2070/5700xt or greater range and struggle to run 4K at reasonable settings seems odd to me...

Borderlands 3. I normally play it at home on a 1080p screen that can do 120hz and Normally I can run it in DirectX-12 mode and run it at a steady 120 FPS at all times on max settings in-game, only dipping down in to the mid to low 70's in some combat scenes, but never below 60. I connected it to my friend's 4K screen and loaded the game and it was instantly 18-22 FPS. I started turning off graphics settings trying to get it to run right and I had almost everything turned off and finally got it to run around mid-50's FPS. Also ARK: Survival Evolved is terrible in 4K. I had to turn almost all settings off to minimum except view distance just to get 60 FPS @ 4K in ARK. I also play american truck sim with a lot of community modded trailers and cargo and have one mod where it makes community modded trailers and cargo spawn for the in-traffic trucks we see driving around and I can run that at 1080p max settings (Except resolution scaling off) at 80~120 FPS (80's minimums in cities) at home. But at 4K I had to drop almost everything down/off just to get 60 FPS. It looked terrible. In my personal opinion 4K is not viable / way too much of a sacrifice to have playable frame rate. I would much rather play at 1080p with high refresh rate with all the pretty effects maxed out personally.

And before you ask about my computer, it's a Ryzen 5 2600, overclocked @ 4.2 Ghz all-core with 16GB DDR4 @ 3533 Mhz @ 16-16-16. And windows 10 64-bit. I might have a better time of it if I had a 9900K or a Ryzen 3900X system. That may be a factor into it but I don't know if it would make that big of a difference. 4K stuff is usually graphics card limiting, not so much system limiting.

Fair enough, out of those the only one I have is Borderlands 3 which I havent played much of (had my borderlands fill in 1/2 and PS). That said I will give it to you that BL3 seems to eat pixels from the testing I ran tonight. That said you should def be able to pull reasonable 4K full native, or 4K scaled settings.

It will take me a bit to render them all down from 100Mb/s raw and then upload them cuz they are at 4K but I ran some testing for you and have 6 bench runs.

The primary three (the ones I would actually use) are a settings balanced to 4K native, a settings balanced to 4K output with 75% rez, one is maxed "badaxx" at 4K output with 50% rez. Of those maxed @ 50% is the worst looking IMHO. These are all shoting for around 60FPS, and on my GPU are a bit under that, but on a 5700XT/2070s/1080ti or better should be more or less a solid 60.

Along with those I have 3 additionals, one is 4K full native @ "High" preset that the game defaulted to for my system, one is 4K full native @ "Ultra" preset, and the last for lolz is a "True Max" with 4K on Badaxx settings with 200% rez scaling (8K rendering). That last one is a slide show, and its worth noting that it would require a GPU with 16GB VRAM as it was sonsistently at like 13-14GB VRAM usage (had to use AMD's memory segment feature).

But if you have a 5700XT or anything within 10%-ish in performance there are a few options to get 4K at good frames and good quality.

[🦊Λℚ𝓤ΛƑΛᗯҜᔕ🦊]

引用自 xSOSxHawkens：

But if you have a 5700XT or anything within 10%-ish in performance there are a few options to get 4K at good frames and good quality.

The bottom line is why would anyone willingly pay either the price of a 5700 XT, or $700 for my card when they know they'll have to run almost all games at medium to low settings just because they're trying to play it at 4K. That just seems.. sad to me.

[Moonvalley]

引用自 meh：

引用自 Serika Onoe：

i already can get close to 60 fps in 4K on my RX 580 on the settings I USE, the 5700xt will destroy my rx 580 so therefore, with the settings I USE, in the games I PLAY, i will get close to a locked 60fps in 4K if i chose to run it in that resolution and to be completely honest, anyone who spends 700$ on a graphics card is an idiot imo....

But the 5700xt isn't a 4k card, and when people ask this question they're referring to current demands from games of today whilst maintaining high settings

as stated about in my initial post, i do NOT play modern trash AAA games. i play well built indie games or games that a multiple years old and have actually fixed to a working state. i have zero respect for modern game developers, as they are lazy bums who throw out broken products after broken products and than insult US for giving their games low scores....yes this is a run on sentence but i do not care :D

[xSOSxHawkens]

引用自 Aquafawks：

引用自 xSOSxHawkens：

But if you have a 5700XT or anything within 10%-ish in performance there are a few options to get 4K at good frames and good quality.

The bottom line is why would anyone willingly pay either the price of a 5700 XT, or $700 for my card when they know they'll have to run almost all games at medium to low settings just because they're trying to play it at 4K. That just seems.. sad to me.

First, you *need* to quit it with the blantant BS that it has to be all medium and lows....

I was pulling mixtures of Medium and High (with *no* lows) on full native 4K in Borderlands 3 tonight with 52fps averages and have the vids to upload for proof, and thats on a slower Vega 64, meaning a 10-20% faster 5700XT would pull a pretty solid 60. And thats one of the games you gave. I also dont have to run any lows in Battlefields, or most any other modern title, period.

On the whole, with anything late 2019 through 2020 I generally run a mixture of medium and high with games either tending towards more mediums with some highs or towards more highs with some mediums.

For anything early 2019 or older its 4K full native with either high, near max, or max settings. Mediums are not generally used at all.

Again, this is with a Vega 64 which is 10-20% slower than a 5700XT...

Now, as to your question as to why anyone would willingly spend the price (~$400 USD) for decent quality 4K... Well, I can hands down tell you my 4K quality is easilly 2-3x that of the "4K" any console can put out. I easily call that worth the 400 bucks I paid...

Now as I will leave it to the community to decide tomorrow night when I upload the vids of BL3, the bigger question if why anyone would want to jump up to the next step or higher (for 4K, not high refresh). There is little difference between setings optimised 4K and true 4K in real world view but there is in FPS performance... If I can pull high quality good looking 4K at 400 bucks, and if I can pull 100% maxed 4K @ 30fps and see there is little difference visually, why should I shell out the extra $800 USD to upgrade for that maxed settings 4K that is little different in looks?... That is what would seem sad to me, paying +$800 for placebo quality increase...

引用自 Serika Onoe：

引用自 meh：

But the 5700xt isn't a 4k card, and when people ask this question they're referring to current demands from games of today whilst maintaining high settings

as stated about in my initial post, i do NOT play modern trash AAA games. i play well built indie games or games that a multiple years old and have actually fixed to a working state. i have zero respect for modern game developers, as they are lazy bums who throw out broken products after broken products and than insult US for giving their games low scores....yes this is a run on sentence but i do not care :D

In that case man either card will run wonders for you and be overkill for 4K in most of those types of titles ;) You will be happy either way!

But unless you have a real need for Ray Tracing on those titles you might opt for a 5700xt to save the cash over the RTX lineup for the same general rendering performance ;)

[AbedsBrother]

引用自 Aquafawks：

引用自 xSOSxHawkens：

What games do you play that had to have their settings turned down so low as to have a major negative impact on quality just to run 4K on something comparable to a 5700XT?...

I mean... modern Far Crys, Crysis's, Metro's, Battlefields, Bathesda titles, Call of Duty's, All popular F2P, E-Sports and BR games, modern CIV and Anno tittles, Borderlands's, Outerworlds, Monster Hunter World, GTA, Killing Floor 2, The Forrest, R6S...

I cant think of a game I have to drop any lower than mostly high with a couple select mediums, and most I get even better than that.

Serisouly, what title do you play that you have had this issue?...

I mean, I get what you are saying to an extent, but to have anything in the 1080/Vega64/2070/5700xt or greater range and struggle to run 4K at reasonable settings seems odd to me...

Borderlands 3. I normally play it at home on a 1080p screen that can do 120hz and Normally I can run it in DirectX-12 mode and run it at a steady 120 FPS at all times on max settings in-game, only dipping down in to the mid to low 70's in some combat scenes, but never below 60. I connected it to my friend's 4K screen and loaded the game and it was instantly 18-22 FPS. I started turning off graphics settings trying to get it to run right and I had almost everything turned off and finally got it to run around mid-50's FPS. Also ARK: Survival Evolved is terrible in 4K. I had to turn almost all settings off to minimum except view distance just to get 60 FPS @ 4K in ARK. I also play american truck sim with a lot of community modded trailers and cargo and have one mod where it makes community modded trailers and cargo spawn for the in-traffic trucks we see driving around and I can run that at 1080p max settings (Except resolution scaling off) at 80~120 FPS (80's minimums in cities) at home. But at 4K I had to drop almost everything down/off just to get 60 FPS. It looked terrible. In my personal opinion 4K is not viable / way too much of a sacrifice to have playable frame rate. I would much rather play at 1080p with high refresh rate with all the pretty effects maxed out personally.

And before you ask about my computer, it's a Ryzen 5 2600, overclocked @ 4.2 Ghz all-core with 16GB DDR4 @ 3533 Mhz @ 16-16-16. And windows 10 64-bit. I might have a better time of it if I had a 9900K or a Ryzen 3900X system. That may be a factor into it but I don't know if it would make that big of a difference. 4K stuff is usually graphics card limiting, not so much system limiting.

You can add Deus Ex Mankind Divided and Assassin's Creed Origins. I've tried both of them in 4k on my 5700XT. Mankind Divided ran at a mix of Low & Medium, while AC Origins needed the low preset (w/ maxed textures). (I was aiming for 60fps in both games.)

[Moonvalley]

引用自 xSOSxHawkens：

引用自 Aquafawks：

The bottom line is why would anyone willingly pay either the price of a 5700 XT, or $700 for my card when they know they'll have to run almost all games at medium to low settings just because they're trying to play it at 4K. That just seems.. sad to me.

First, you *need* to quit it with the blantant BS that it has to be all medium and lows....

I was pulling mixtures of Medium and High (with *no* lows) on full native 4K in Borderlands 3 tonight with 52fps averages and have the vids to upload for proof, and thats on a slower Vega 64, meaning a 10-20% faster 5700XT would pull a pretty solid 60. And thats one of the games you gave. I also dont have to run any lows in Battlefields, or most any other modern title, period.

On the whole, with anything late 2019 through 2020 I generally run a mixture of medium and high with games either tending towards more mediums with some highs or towards more highs with some mediums.

For anything early 2019 or older its 4K full native with either high, near max, or max settings. Mediums are not generally used at all.

Again, this is with a Vega 64 which is 10-20% slower than a 5700XT...

Now, as to your question as to why anyone would willingly spend the price (~$400 USD) for decent quality 4K... Well, I can hands down tell you my 4K quality is easilly 2-3x that of the "4K" any console can put out. I easily call that worth the 400 bucks I paid...

Now as I will leave it to the community to decide tomorrow night when I upload the vids of BL3, the bigger question if why anyone would want to jump up to the next step or higher (for 4K, not high refresh). There is little difference between setings optimised 4K and true 4K in real world view but there is in FPS performance... If I can pull high quality good looking 4K at 400 bucks, and if I can pull 100% maxed 4K @ 30fps and see there is little difference visually, why should I shell out the extra $800 USD to upgrade for that maxed settings 4K that is little different in looks?... That is what would seem sad to me, paying +$800 for placebo quality increase...

引用自 Serika Onoe：

as stated about in my initial post, i do NOT play modern trash AAA games. i play well built indie games or games that a multiple years old and have actually fixed to a working state. i have zero respect for modern game developers, as they are lazy bums who throw out broken products after broken products and than insult US for giving their games low scores....yes this is a run on sentence but i do not care :D

In that case man either card will run wonders for you and be overkill for 4K in most of those types of titles ;) You will be happy either way!

But unless you have a real need for Ray Tracing on those titles you might opt for a 5700xt to save the cash over the RTX lineup for the same general rendering performance ;)

Yea, i changed out the 4K monitor for a 144hz 1440p curved (27 inches) still got the 5700xt, should last a while. Rather have a smooth as butter framerate > Resolution tbh.

[Moonvalley]

引用自 AbedsBrother：

引用自 Aquafawks：

Borderlands 3. I normally play it at home on a 1080p screen that can do 120hz and Normally I can run it in DirectX-12 mode and run it at a steady 120 FPS at all times on max settings in-game, only dipping down in to the mid to low 70's in some combat scenes, but never below 60. I connected it to my friend's 4K screen and loaded the game and it was instantly 18-22 FPS. I started turning off graphics settings trying to get it to run right and I had almost everything turned off and finally got it to run around mid-50's FPS. Also ARK: Survival Evolved is terrible in 4K. I had to turn almost all settings off to minimum except view distance just to get 60 FPS @ 4K in ARK. I also play american truck sim with a lot of community modded trailers and cargo and have one mod where it makes community modded trailers and cargo spawn for the in-traffic trucks we see driving around and I can run that at 1080p max settings (Except resolution scaling off) at 80~120 FPS (80's minimums in cities) at home. But at 4K I had to drop almost everything down/off just to get 60 FPS. It looked terrible. In my personal opinion 4K is not viable / way too much of a sacrifice to have playable frame rate. I would much rather play at 1080p with high refresh rate with all the pretty effects maxed out personally.

And before you ask about my computer, it's a Ryzen 5 2600, overclocked @ 4.2 Ghz all-core with 16GB DDR4 @ 3533 Mhz @ 16-16-16. And windows 10 64-bit. I might have a better time of it if I had a 9900K or a Ryzen 3900X system. That may be a factor into it but I don't know if it would make that big of a difference. 4K stuff is usually graphics card limiting, not so much system limiting.

You can add Deus Ex Mankind Divided and Assassin's Creed Origins. I've tried both of them in 4k on my 5700XT. Mankind Divided ran at a mix of Low & Medium, while AC Origins needed the low preset (w/ maxed textures). (I was aiming for 60fps in both games.)

Not sure about Deus Ex but AC Origins is not a very optimized game on PC (or so i hear)

[r.linder]

引用自 Serika Onoe：

引用自 xSOSxHawkens：

First, you *need* to quit it with the blantant BS that it has to be all medium and lows....

I was pulling mixtures of Medium and High (with *no* lows) on full native 4K in Borderlands 3 tonight with 52fps averages and have the vids to upload for proof, and thats on a slower Vega 64, meaning a 10-20% faster 5700XT would pull a pretty solid 60. And thats one of the games you gave. I also dont have to run any lows in Battlefields, or most any other modern title, period.

On the whole, with anything late 2019 through 2020 I generally run a mixture of medium and high with games either tending towards more mediums with some highs or towards more highs with some mediums.

For anything early 2019 or older its 4K full native with either high, near max, or max settings. Mediums are not generally used at all.

Again, this is with a Vega 64 which is 10-20% slower than a 5700XT...

Now, as to your question as to why anyone would willingly spend the price (~$400 USD) for decent quality 4K... Well, I can hands down tell you my 4K quality is easilly 2-3x that of the "4K" any console can put out. I easily call that worth the 400 bucks I paid...

Now as I will leave it to the community to decide tomorrow night when I upload the vids of BL3, the bigger question if why anyone would want to jump up to the next step or higher (for 4K, not high refresh). There is little difference between setings optimised 4K and true 4K in real world view but there is in FPS performance... If I can pull high quality good looking 4K at 400 bucks, and if I can pull 100% maxed 4K @ 30fps and see there is little difference visually, why should I shell out the extra $800 USD to upgrade for that maxed settings 4K that is little different in looks?... That is what would seem sad to me, paying +$800 for placebo quality increase...





In that case man either card will run wonders for you and be overkill for 4K in most of those types of titles ;) You will be happy either way!

But unless you have a real need for Ray Tracing on those titles you might opt for a 5700xt to save the cash over the RTX lineup for the same general rendering performance ;)

Yea, i changed out the 4K monitor for a 144hz 1440p curved (27 inches) still got the 5700xt, should last a while. Rather have a smooth as butter framerate > Resolution tbh.

I'm still at 1080p with my 5700XT. Still don't care to move up resolution. (24in 240Hz and 27in 144Hz (yuck))

[xSOSxHawkens]

引用自 Serika Onoe：

Yea, i changed out the 4K monitor for a 144hz 1440p curved (27 inches) still got the 5700xt, should last a while. Rather have a smooth as butter framerate > Resolution tbh.

That might be an issue for you depending on the rest of the build. 4K is mainly all a GPU load thing, but high refresh is both a GPU and a CPU/System load issue, as you are doubling the frames and not just the per-frame load. CPU is the next most important part for high refresh, with RAM being next. Even a 2080ti can be held back from 144Hz if it dosnt have a CPU behind it that can push the game engine in question at 144 ticks.

And yes, AC:O is a horrid hog on resources. And no, it is def one of the *few* titles that is not playable at decent settings full native 4K. But then again, that holds true for just about any GPU with that game. And its not even a title that has super forward thinking things that are just too much right now. No, it is just hog. Reminds me of GTA-IV or Saints Row 2 in that regard :/

[AbedsBrother]

引用自 Serika Onoe：

引用自 AbedsBrother：

You can add Deus Ex Mankind Divided and Assassin's Creed Origins. I've tried both of them in 4k on my 5700XT. Mankind Divided ran at a mix of Low & Medium, while AC Origins needed the low preset (w/ maxed textures). (I was aiming for 60fps in both games.)

Not sure about Deus Ex but AC Origins is not a very optimized game on PC (or so i hear)

DXMD is a best-case for Radeon, it's always favored Radeon gpus going all the way back to its launch. AC Origins is a worst-case for Radeon, it heavily favors Nvidia. The difference between the two at 4k is that in DXMD you can set some settings to Medium, while AC Origins needs to keep everything Low.

引用自 xSOSxHawkens：

And yes, AC:O is a horrid hog on resources. And no, it is def one of the *few* titles that is not playable at decent settings full native 4K. But then again, that holds true for just about any GPU with that game. And its not even a title that has super forward thinking things that are just too much right now. No, it is just hog. Reminds me of GTA-IV or Saints Row 2 in that regard :/

Basically the Arkham Knight of its generation.

[Moonvalley]

引用自 xSOSxHawkens：

引用自 Serika Onoe：

Yea, i changed out the 4K monitor for a 144hz 1440p curved (27 inches) still got the 5700xt, should last a while. Rather have a smooth as butter framerate > Resolution tbh.

That might be an issue for you depending on the rest of the build. 4K is mainly all a GPU load thing, but high refresh is both a GPU and a CPU/System load issue, as you are doubling the frames and not just the per-frame load. CPU is the next most important part for high refresh, with RAM being next. Even a 2080ti can be held back from 144Hz if it dosnt have a CPU behind it that can push the game engine in question at 144 ticks.

And yes, AC:O is a horrid hog on resources. And no, it is def one of the *few* titles that is not playable at decent settings full native 4K. But then again, that holds true for just about any GPU with that game. And its not even a title that has super forward thinking things that are just too much right now. No, it is just hog. Reminds me of GTA-IV or Saints Row 2 in that regard :/

i mean my Ryzen 2600 is probably not ideal for 144hz but i really do not play anything demanding. as long as i can hold above 60 fps in most games, it will still be smooth. Most graphically intensive game i'll play this year is probably Cyberpunk 2077 and by that point, i'll have gotten a 3700x (unless the new ryzen chips are close)

i am fine lowering settings to keep frames up, Usually as long as textures, af and draw distance are max, the other stuff can be shut off for all i care lol.

[xSOSxHawkens]

引用自 Serika Onoe：

引用自 xSOSxHawkens：

That might be an issue for you depending on the rest of the build. 4K is mainly all a GPU load thing, but high refresh is both a GPU and a CPU/System load issue, as you are doubling the frames and not just the per-frame load. CPU is the next most important part for high refresh, with RAM being next. Even a 2080ti can be held back from 144Hz if it dosnt have a CPU behind it that can push the game engine in question at 144 ticks.

And yes, AC:O is a horrid hog on resources. And no, it is def one of the *few* titles that is not playable at decent settings full native 4K. But then again, that holds true for just about any GPU with that game. And its not even a title that has super forward thinking things that are just too much right now. No, it is just hog. Reminds me of GTA-IV or Saints Row 2 in that regard :/

i mean my Ryzen 2600 is probably not ideal for 144hz but i really do not play anything demanding. as long as i can hold above 60 fps in most games, it will still be smooth. Most graphically intensive game i'll play this year is probably Cyberpunk 2077 and by that point, i'll have gotten a 3700x (unless the new ryzen chips are close)

i am fine lowering settings to keep frames up, Usually as long as textures, af and draw distance are max, the other stuff can be shut off for all i care lol.

2600 should def be holding 60, and will probably do fine for high refresh in a number of titles. And yeh, so long as your board supports it you can always sell off the 2600 and jump to a 3600 or better for the IPC gains that will give you that FPS boost. If you are lucky you might even hold out and jump to ryzen 4k ;)