5120 x 2160 is an insane resolution. I personally don't even consider the 4090 a 4K capable card, at least not at high refresh rates.
Oh I agree,.it will be a long way off for me! Guessing about 5-6 years before it's adoptable at a reasonable price
Thats my next monitor, im just hanging out for OLED and 100hz, LG reckons Qtr 1 2025
Veeeeey on the fence about these monitor please, because burn in would be way easier considering the nature of PC backgrounds, apps, toolbars, desktop icons etc
Hopefully the techniques improve more aao as these become more.commom in the PC arena.
120hz on OLED feels better than 165hz on IPS.
It's because of the response times of OLED vs higher refresh rates which like other things have diminishing returns. Unfortunately I can never consider an OLED for myself due to how I use my PC (not saying it isn't a valid option for others), no matter how much anti burn in measures they put in. I bought the rog Pg279qm for my first 1440P monitor and no regrets (except 3070 instead of 3080 coming from 1080p). Just gotta wait for the next best thing which is microLED but that's not gonna be for at least another few years if not more especially regarding its price.
240fps and above is high refresh rate. We already have 240hz 4K monitors, a 4090 would not be a good pair, at least in my opinion,
You are chasing the dragon. Developers will always add graphical fidelity options that push the latest hardware, regardless of how powerful it is. It is up to us to reduce those options to obtain our desired fps. You could get 240 fps on nearly every game at 4k on a 4090 by reducing graphical settings right now.
The 4090 runs cs go at 340 fps average at 4k ultra settings and is cpu bottlenecked on competitive settings. Does that make it a 4K high refresh card?
531.79 now available.
I'll wait until the dust has settled to maybe upgrade.....the last two or three updates were black sheep in regards to a couple of software titles I use, and I suspect this one will be no different. Having a read through the release notes for the latest driver hints at a couple of fixes, mainly for users of RTX3xxx cards and BF2042 (bit of a surprise there, as I have not really read anywhere else, including on here of others having any identified issues as mentioned), but no other existing ones. Only sprouting new support for one title only.
*edit: alllthougghhhhhh, just came across this link looking through your links bitpushr – might suss that out and see if it makes any difference: https://www.reddit.com/r/batt
Although it is referring to Battlefield titles, perhaps it may solve the issue in other ones? Just looking for the needle in the haystack, but hey? it "may" just work. If it doesn't fix the issues I'm having, then it's simple to just reverse the change and tick it off as a "nope".
*edit 2: Just added the registry "hack" mentioned above, which was not present previously and rebooted. No problems detected so far, will be interesting though when I do attempt to update my drivers (*takes deep breath*)
Rolled back so many times now got it down pat. Just slightly annoying when you do have to do it....
Just going to play a few games first to make sure everything is still running as expected. If this does fix the issue(s) I have when updating the video drivers, then I owe Nvidia a bit of an apology and re-direct my concerns directly back at Microsoft/Windows.....
Does that make it a 4K high refresh card?
A GTX 1060 can do that at 1440p too (I used to play with 400+ FPS) yet no one considers a GTX 1060 a high refresh rate 1440p card. Everyone considers it a low end 1080p card in modern day.
I owe Nvidia a bit of an apology and re-direct my concerns directly back at Microsoft/Windows
Wouldn't be the first time people have had to do that ;)
just came across this link looking through your links bitpushr – might suss that out and see if it makes any difference: https://www.reddit.com/r/batt
Looks like it could be promising. Can't say I had that issue playing BF4 myself.
Can't say I had that issue playing BF4 myself.
I've been having an issue with BF1 recently, not sure if it's related but everytime I open the game, it just closes after a black screen for 20 seconds. Not sure if it's a driver issue, I think it's related to my EA Play Subscription.
I own the Battlefield Pack on Steam which includes a few of the BF games (including BF1) but I also owned EA Play and cancelled it, since then I haven't been able to access BF1 although the I'm getting similar issues as the peeps on BF4, so I'll try updating my driver for once lol
everytime I open the game, it just closes after a black screen for 20 seconds. Not sure if it's a driver issue, I think it's related to my EA Play Subscription.
Shouldn't be subscription-related, but I'm not of much help with that issue; no problems playing the BF games on my 6900 XT.
Hopefully it resolves with a GPU driver update or other workaround.
Ok, re my earlier post, I've done the following:
Added the registry "hack" as mentioned earlier and tested – passed with initial look around, Browsing, email, etc. Opened up a couple of quick small programs that use 3D graphics and more specifically the video card – no issues there.
Took a deep breath and installed the new drivers. No issues suddenly appeared. I _didn't_ wipe out the old ones first using DDU, rather let the installer just decide what needed updating and what didn't as per the usual way. Rebooted, and everything still runs as expected.
Final Test – Fired up MSFS, as this is the main program I have been having grief with, and just did two quick flights between Canberra and Sydney each way (40 mins per flight, including taxi time). No CTD/error messages coming up 5 minutes into the flight, etc, where as before it was coming up and crashing the program previously with driver versions post 531.29.
Whether the new drivers finally do work again, or it is indeed the Registry change will take a little bit more testing, although now I'm more than happy to just leave that in there and keep on going now!
Re the registry change again – I was also having a couple of small annoying issues in a few games, not just MSFS, where if there was no input made for a few minutes, and then you went to use the mouse or keyboard, the screen would freeze for up to about 5 seconds or so. I wonder if these were now related and this will also fix that? Time will tell.
Machine main specs as tested are:
i7 10700K (not overclocked)
64GB RAM (DDR4)
RTX 2070 Super (again not overclocked)
MSFS running in full screen mode, 5940x 1080 across 3 x 23 inch monitors.
Not gonna lie, first time I've ever seen that resolution :)
Sorry, should have added with bezel correction. Natively without it's 5760x1080, but then you have stretched images between the frames of the monitors, etc...the extra bit gives you the illusion of one wide monitor, with two black bars, which are hardly noticeable when seeing the entire screen as one – I'm used to it now.
There's so much content in the last 2 pages lol.
once you start to rely on MSI afterburner to display the frame counter than the bucks stop there.
I find it essential. I don't stare at it fixated, but if I feel like the game I'm playing isn't performing well it's nice to know if it's a GPU or CPU issue or thermal throttling + I always set a custom fan curve at the very least. I have a couple of mates that have never even installed afterburner, so I'm not saying my way is right.
I'm in the camp that after 120hz....you can't really tell the difference and its other factors that play a bigger part.
I had a 165VA ultrawide from AOC for a couple of hours and returned it. It was the biggest piece of junk ever.
120hz on OLED feels better than 165hz on IPS.
I feel like there's not a lot of difference between 90+ fps to 120fps. But can still notice a difference between 120fps and 165fps.
Exact same plot, same characters, same everything.
Just because they rebuilt it on a new engine with a new skin, doesn't mean that much to me:
I couldn't play it on ps3 when it came out at 30fps and lower. It was just impossible to aim with imho. I might give it a go now that it's on PC. I'm assuming it will be a pretty ordinary port though?
It's because of the response times of OLED vs higher refresh rates which like other things have diminishing returns. Unfortunately I can never consider an OLED for myself due to how I use my PC (not saying it isn't a valid option for others), no matter how much anti burn in measures they put in.
Are you saying that because you think you'll get burn in? I use my LG 65 CX oled for PC and console gaming and have had no issues with burn in. And even if you do LG will sort you out well past the warranty date. I've just had my screen replaced and my Mainboard. Out of warranty. Basically a new tv. No burn in. It did have a different random issue which was fixed by getting a new Mainboard , but I got a new screen as well because I asked nicely lol. LG would rather take the hit on replacing them than have a bad reputation for oleds and being known to do nothing about it. And they are built super simple these days to swap out everything is like a 30 minute job.
Whirlpool Illuminati writes...
I couldn't play it on ps3 when it came out at 30fps and lower. It was just impossible to aim with imho. I might give it a go now that it's on PC. I'm assuming it will be a pretty ordinary port though?
I didn't have any trouble on the PS3. 30fps isn't fantastic, but frame delivery was nice and smooth, so it wasn't game breaking.
It isn't like it was a super precision game though to begin with.
Whirlpool Illuminati writes...
Are you saying that because you think you'll get burn in? I use my LG 65 CX oled for PC and console gaming and have had no issues with burn in.
Yes. Don't get me wrong the companies have taken great strides to remedy it with pixel refresh and so on but its always just something in the back of my mind. OLED is cool tech, not to mention we also have QD-OLEDS too, but i've used pretty much only 4 monitors, 2 of them being expensive purchases so want them to last as long as i can. A 1680x1050 60hz monitor (cant remember the brand) a Phillips 1080p 75hz monitor that lasted me 10 years or so and after 5 became a secondary monitor to my first gaming one, the Acer predator XB214H.
It took until my Philips died to buy another monitor which is why i now have the PG279QM (my first 1440p AND IPS monitor plus bloody expensive) and the Acer is now my secondary display. I imagine these will last me a good while until microLED becomes a thing. At least that's what I'm hoping :)
Not saying it to dissuade anyone from picking up an OLED or QD-OLED its just how I feel about them. From seeing a few in person they are amazing displays. Especially now that we are finally getting monitor sized ones as opposed to just TV's but i just made a big monitor purchase so its not really at the top of my list at this point. And if its as you report on them replacing screens with burn in even after warranty, I imagine more people would pick them up too.
I couldn't play it on ps3 when it came out at 30fps and lower. It was just impossible to aim with imho. I might give it a go now that it's on PC. I'm assuming it will be a pretty ordinary port though?
Apparently a few patches have fixed a good chunk of issues but I'd double check before buying it on the PC.
but i just made a big monitor purchase so its not really at the top of my list at this point.
Yeah, you sound well set with the recent monitor purchases. There's no reason why they couldn't last you 5 or 6 years + as well.
A GTX 1060 can do that at 1440p too (I used to play with 400+ FPS) yet no one considers a GTX 1060 a high refresh rate 1440p card.
You are not presenting a coherent or valid argument against the 4080/4090 being a 4k card or even a definition of what makes a card a "insert resolution" card. It is a moving target based on the graphical ambitions of the development studios of the day. Move on, your are chasing a dragon you will never catch unless you tune your games to hit your fps standards.
I had to loan my PSU to a friend for testing his system. I am left with corsair RM750x, I've discovered it only has 2x GPU power cables, but with 4 heads, So I connected all 4 heads to an RTX 4090, I know technically 300W is the limit, but unofficially anyone know if I could reasonably get 400watts out? That would be at 90% GPU power setting
I am left with corsair RM750x, I've discovered it only has 2x power cables, but with 4 heads, So I connected all 4 heads to an RTX 4090, I know technically 300W is the limit, but unofficially anyone know if I could reasonably get 400watts out? That would be at 90% GPU power setting
I am currently running a 4090 on a RM850 with two power cables / four heads and it's pulling up to 450W @ 100% GPU power setting no problems at all, so I don't see why what you propose wouldn't work. You could always GPU limit power to 66% ie. 300W just to be safe until you get your PSU back.