Affordable GPU to run an Ultrawide monitor?

[adamsonm]

Hi guys,

I'm looking to upgrade my monitor to an ultrawide, the LG 34UC98. I don't currently own a compatible GPU to run this monitor at it's full resolution and refresh rate. I'm looking for an affordable GPU to replace my ageing ATi HD 6850. I don't want to spend too much on a GPU as the way I see it, it will become outdated pretty quickly. I'd rather purchase an affordable GPU which can do the job for a number of years!

I have a 750 watt power supply so power shouldn't be an issue here.

Any ideas?

[jim]

What qualifies as affordable, from your perspective?

[spolsh]

3440 x 1440 sort of cuts the more affordable graphics cards out (for gaming anyway) - depending on if you want ultra settings and all the bells and whistles, you could be stuck with the 1070 / 1080 to turn everything up. I'd reckon an RX480 or 1060 would cope for lower settings.

If it's not for gaming, then you could get away with a lower performance card OK.

Check out reviews of some cards, your monitor will be a bit more difficult to power than standard 2560 x 1440 monitors, most reviews test at that resolution.

[adamsonm]

Good question Jim, something I probably should have mentioned. Affordable is £200 or less.

Honestly, the main purpose for the ultrawide monitor is purely for work, however I will game on it occasionally, nothing serious though. I mean I could use it to play Battlefield 1 for example however I'm not too fussed about quality, game wise.

I was having a look at the RX480/470 before replying to this post, coincidence?

[cptwhite_uk]

If you budget has a hard £200 limit you want a RX480 4Gb:

https://www.scan.co.uk/products/nda-...apKBoChL7w_wcB

Otherwise I would recommend the GTX1060 6Gb or RX480 8Gb:

http://www.ebuyer.com/752926-zotac-g...vLdxoC9ITw_wcB

or

http://www.ebuyer.com/751296-xfx-rad...AjdRoCVGbw_wcB

All should run Battlefield 1 in native resolution in medium/high details around 60fps. But I think the GTX1060 6Gb or RX480 8Gb might be preferable for the increased RAM. 4Gb is probably a little small when getting to that resolution (3440 x 1440)

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

Good question Jim, something I probably should have mentioned. Affordable is £200 or less.

Honestly, the main purpose for the ultrawide monitor is purely for work, however I will game on it occasionally, nothing serious though. I mean I could use it to play Battlefield 1 for example however I'm not too fussed about quality, game wise.

I was having a look at the RX480/470 before replying to this post, coincidence?

I am on qHD which means around 4MP and your monitor would be around 5MP.

My GTX960 can run some games OKish at native resolution. An RX480 or GTX1060 will be double the speed.

[adamsonm]

I'll look into those GPUs you've mentioned.

I do have a thought however. For example if I wasn't to game at all, could an integrated GPU do the job in running at 3440 X 1440 resolution? Obviously I would need to upgrade my current CPU for this...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[EndlessWaves]

I was having a look at the RX480/470 before replying to this post, coincidence?

It is the most popular card right now.

In gaming terms that monitor supports Freesync so you'll want an AMD card to get the most from it as nVidia aren't currently supporting the technology.

I do have a thought however. For example if I wasn't to game at all, could an integrated GPU do the job in running at 3440 X 1440 resolution? Obviously I would need to upgrade my current CPU for this...

Are you sure your current card can't do it? The 6870 has DisplayPort 1.2 so it certainly has the total bandwidth to handle much higher resolution screens than that (although I don't know if it has an SST limit like the early Intel graphics did).

The current Skylake integrated graphics can handle three 3840x2160@60hz screens simultaneously, so a single 3440x1440 screen won't cause it any problems.

I don't know what Bristol Ridge, Raven Ridge and Zeppelin will do but I'd expect them to be comparable, if not better.

[kcajjones]

I'd think for ultrawide 1440p, you'd need a GTX 1070/1080 for good framerates in recent games. It's a pretty high resolution.

For comparison when looking at performance benchmarks:

4K is 8,294,400 pixels
Ultrawide on that monitor is 4,953,600 pixels
1440p is 3,686,400 pixels

So Ultrawide is ~25% more pixels than 1440p but ~40% less pixels than 4K.
Obviously there's more things than resolution that affect graphics card performance, but resolution is one of the largest factors.

[realnikb]

I'd think for ultrawide 1440p, you'd need a GTX 1070/1080 for good framerates in recent games. It's a pretty high resolution.

For comparison when looking at performance benchmarks:

4K is 8,294,400 pixels
Ultrawide on that monitor is 4,953,600 pixels
1440p is 3,686,400 pixels

So Ultrawide is ~25% more pixels than 1440p but ~40% less pixels than 4K.
Obviously there's more things than resolution that affect graphics card performance, but resolution is one of the largest factors.

I think you missed the part where he said £200 budget or so and it's mainly for work.

I mean you're totally correct, if you're shelling out around £1,000 on 21:9 34" display for gaming you should be doing around half of that on a GPU for gaming... but if he's not interested in gaming it's kinda a moot point.