Looking at getting a 4k 240hz qd-oled and I want to drive it at high fps. My 1080 ti is currently managing 144hz on my 1440p monitor, but it takes some tweaking to keep it around 80-90% usage so it doesn’t scream in pain.
I prefer sharpness and responsiveness over ray tracing and picture quality as I personally don’t think games look more realistic or better, just different, with image quality pushed to the max vs mid or low).
Is there any bench markers / review sites that test what settings are needed to achieve 240 hz 4k on different cards?
4060 getting 18 fps on ultra with ray tracing on in a game is not a useful test result for me (maybe even for anyone?)
It depends on the game, but certainly not all games will be able to reach 240fps at 4k high settings, even with an RTX 4090. So it depends on what you mean by “required” here.
I would look at reviews for the GPUs you mentioned and check out some of the fps numbers achieved in games that they test at 4k. That should give you a general idea of what to expect. My general recollection is that the top tier GPUs tend to sit in the low 100s at 4k for modern games, but it varies wildly.
I have a 7950x + 7900xtx, gaming on Linux, 144Hz 1440p. Been playing a lot of cyberpunk (high settings, no upscaling) lately, off the top of my head 100-150 fps are typical for me.
Wouldn’t mind 4k, but I do worry I won’t be able to drive it fast enough.
Short answer; No. A 5090 or better is required to get 240+ FPS @ 4k.
That said, not all frames have to be equal. It is possible in theory to make every other or third frame “good” and the other frame is generated using frame generation techniques. This will bring you closer but not completely towards your goal, maybe 200-ish FPS in most titles on a 4090 @ 4k High, 160-170 on a 7900 XTX.
4k high refresh rate isnt really a reasonable thing to ask especially no one is doing multiGPU (like SLI) support anymore.
It is achievable on esport games but if you want that kind of refresh rate on AAA titles, I’d keep to a saner lower display resolution like a 1440p.
The higher the refresh rate of the monitor, the less noticeable benefit it gives. Also you may run into issues with your display cable connecting your GPU and monitor together its going to have a bandwidth issues unless you have display stream compression (adds a tiny imperceptible bit of latency). I think the HDMI 2.1 is still within that spec so you may need a good (expensive) HDMI 2.1 cable.
If I were you, I’d… adjust your seating distance from the monitor (to get the same feel as 4k) and just upgrade the GPU to have some sort of future proofing for high refresh rate AAA-games. You may still want to keep that 1440 monitor that you have but if you must have a higher refresh display, keep the 1440 resolution and maybe go for either a widescreen (vs 4k).
4k monitor seems like it is meant for office productivity (vs gaming) where you need to display many things without resorting to multimonitor setup. Gaming in it seems… wrong especially if you will downgrade your resolution to 1080p or 1440p just to get high refresh rate.
Thanks for the replies, but I fear you might have missed the mark. It’s not about 4k ultra, it’s about 4k 240hz 100% render scale. The games must look sharp and react snappy.
Since I personally do not find games better looking at ultra vs normal conventional reviews have 0 useful information about this. I want crisp 4k and responsive smoothe 240hz. The “prettyness” of ultra settings are such a slight difference to me it never makes sense playing on max graphics in any title.