What graphics card for 4k?

[Morbad]

Frankly, I wouldn't consider anything less than a 1080Ti to be viable for 4k in Elite: Dangerous, unless you aren't playing Horizons content, or are willing to sacrifice other aspects of IQ for resolution.

Of course, this a matter of personal preference and some people are quite happy with what I would consider a flatly intolerable experience.

 

[admiral_Marith]

I have two DisplayPort cables coming tomorrow. Right now feeding the 4 LG 34 inch 4 K HDMI signals form DVI-D port, HDMI port and 2 display ports using a DisplayPort to DVI adaptor. (Because I had them on hand). In theory this should increase my frame rate if what I am reading about the differences is correct. While the card might be HDMI 2.0, the cable isn't and the monitors are circa 2015 so probably not there either. 30 FPS is the max I've seen it drive the game.

The display port cable got the frame rate above 30, so what I don't know is what frame rate DisplayPort and the LG 34UM95 4 K monitor can do together. The cards are two XFX RX-480P (replaced the dying R9-390X's). Primarily because bestbuy had two in stock. Is my limiting factor the video cards or the monitor?

So, what's my limiting factor?

 

[Leo Sagan]

GTX 1080 on a triple monitors setup. I wouldn't mind a 1080Ti tbh but as it is I can run at max details with 60 FPS *most* of the time with the 1080.

 

[CMDR Corlas]

The display port cable got the frame rate above 30, so what I don't know is what frame rate DisplayPort and the LG 34UM95 4 K monitor can do together. The cards are two XFX RX-480P (replaced the dying R9-390X's). Primarily because bestbuy had two in stock. Is my limiting factor the video cards or the monitor?

So, what's my limiting factor?

Display Port will support 60Hz at 4k. I've not looked up the specs of your screens, but with four of them at 4k, the limiter now is almost undoubtably your RX-480 videocards. 4x 4k screens is a LOT of pixels for anything to push, even something top of the line.

 

[Jon flint]

Frankly, I wouldn't consider anything less than a 1080Ti to be viable for 4k in Elite: Dangerous, unless you aren't playing Horizons content, or are willing to sacrifice other aspects of IQ for resolution.

Of course, this a matter of personal preference and some people are quite happy with what I would consider a flatly intolerable experience.

I wouldn't call it intolerable on cards below the 1080ti, as I mentioned earlier it runs fine at 4k/ultra on something as low end as a 1070, although at large planetary ports I do occasionally see a breif dip to 58fps, but it doesn't last too long, certainly wouldn't call it a deal breaker.....

That being said, I was in the 127 Cmdr instance with the small worlds expedition, my FPS was hovering around 43fps

 

[Aashenfox]

I think he'd be better off with the current flagship (1080ti) for 760 bucks, rather than 2014s flagship for 1000. The 1080ti also has DOUBLE the performance than the Titan Zs you'll find on ebay.

 

[Nidhöggr]

yea, or just wait for the amd vega release, it's just around the corner. i use a gtx1080 right now and really look forward for new amd chips.

https://www.pcgamesn.com/amd/amd-vega-gpu-specifications

 

[Crank Larson]

yea, or just wait the the amd vega release, it's just around the corner. i use a gtx1080 right now and really look forward for new amd chips.

Thanks for pointing these out, I'd given up on AMD a long time ago. The news looks promising. Are the Frontier editions for E: D?

 

[Aashenfox]

Thanks for pointing these out, I'd given up on AMD a long time ago. The news looks promising. Are the Frontier editions for E: D?

They're not promising sadly. They'll be 1080 founders equivalent for not much saving.

There's only one reason to go AMD these days, and that's freesync, cos Nvidia's Gsync tech has about 200 dollar nvidia tax.

 

[Crank Larson]

They're not promising sadly. They'll be 1080 founders equivalent for not much saving.

Maybe I should elaborate as to why I find the news promising. I've always had a soft spot for AMD, as they are the underdog. However, I gave up on them completely a few years ago when they dropped so far behind on pretty much everything (CPU, GPU). The latest news gives me hope that they may be able to get back into the game.

 

[Nidhöggr]

since i've seen a vega running doom in 4k on ultra at stable 60-70fps a few months ago, well, i'm happy that amd has finally something good coming up again.

found again: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y8tDaPLHxiE

They're not promising sadly. They'll be 1080 founders equivalent for not much saving.

where does this info come from?

 

[Aashenfox]

Maybe I should elaborate as to why I find the news promising. I've always had a soft spot for AMD, as they are the underdog. However, I gave up on them completely a few years ago when they dropped so far behind on pretty much everything (CPU, GPU). The latest news gives me hope that they may be able to get back into the game.

I'd definitely say there's cause for hope for ATI, the American V8 of the hardware world. They're back on track with the CPUs, but their idea of making graphics better is still to just increase power and transistors, rather than design efficient pipelines.

since i've seen a vega running doom in 4k on ultra at stable 60-70fps a few months ago, well, i'm happy that amd has finally something good coming up again.

found again: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y8tDaPLHxiE





where does this info come from?

I f I remember where I read this I'll post a link, it might come to me. Toms Hardware probably, but I can't honestly remember.

This isn't where I read it initially, but here is another source saying the same thing posted two hours ago.

http://www.trustedreviews.com/news/...nce-release-date-technology-explained-2993156

These are power-hungry cards. With a 295W TDP (thermal design power), the Vega 64 air-cooled model will consume more than 100W more power than the competition, namely the GTX 1070.

599 for their top card, 549 for a 1080 gtx. In summer I game in a 40 degree room with nothing but a desk fan (I live in Athens, in Greece), AMD would simply run too hot for me.

 

[Nidhöggr]

I f I remember where I read this I'll post a link, it might come to me. Toms Hardware probably, but I can't honestly remember.

it's ok. actually i don't belive any theoretical previews based on specs alone. what counts is the real deal. on-hand hardware tests, with avaliable games, and what's more important, games that yet have to be released. games that make use of new feature-sets

ed.:
ah thanks for the update, i'll read that later on.

 

[Aashenfox]

Updated above with sources.

Nah, this isn't guesswork, these people know what they're talking about. Like I say, it isn't the only place you can read this.

Just up to their usual tricks, I'm sorry to say, more power and heat doth not a better a graphics card make.

By the way, that side by side 4k demo where the AMD looked smoother than the Nvidia was fixed, there's a huge uproar abou , the Nvidia was clearly having soe kind of driver problem, many people who had their hands on both rigs said this wasn't an accurate reflection of the performance of the Nvidia card. I don't know if that's the same as the vid you posted, as I can't see youtube from the office, but yeh, it seems ATI kinda rigged a side by side demo and got busted.

 

[Aashenfox]

Still, I have to say, if I was doing it again, I would definitely consider swapping my GTX1080 founders and Dell S2716DG, for the Vega 64 and Freesync equivalent monitor and save about 300 quid probably. Now that I've got them, there's no reason for me to consider that.

 

[Crank Larson]

Mind you, the other problem AMD always had was their awful drivers. When I first started playing E: D, I was on a Radeon 280 R9 with AMD Phenom, both top-end when I bought them. You'd have thought that by using AMD architecture throughout, I'd have had a good stable machine. This wasn't the case - it was the most unstable machine I've ever built, and I never managed to cure it. It would crash at least once during most E: D sessions, whichever driver I used. I seem to remember that E: D also had some AMD specific issues early on.

I moved to Intel i7 and NVidia 980Ti, and now my machine is rock solid. I think it's only ever locked up twice, and both those times were on especially hot days (and my machine is now stored under the stairs in a cupboard, so if I don't remember to open the door when it is hot, bad things can happen).

Still, I'll be looking at the new range with interest. I'm not actually planning on upgrading until VR generation 2 is out, though.

 

[Zebaoth]

4K = 1080p + 2x supersampling, correct?

Correct.

Sporting a gtx 1080 with everything on ultra on 1080p with 2x supersampling and AA off (absolutely not needed with 2x SS) @60Hz
Have yet to see the fps drop below 60.

As aashenfox said, if possible, upgrade to a 2k monitor capable of 144Hz, well worth it. If you've seen a setup like that once you'll ignore 4k until 4k 144Hz will be a thing.
Cheap 27" 144hz monitors are a bit above 300 bucks, worth to consider.