I'm wondering what the best monitor I can invest $500 on. And if my video card (a Sapphire HD 7770 vapor-x) can support it. I do gaming, video streaming and movies. Should I go ultra wide or 4k or something more manageable?
I'm more into ultra wide rather than 4k to be honest. I still feel like 4k is something that needs a bit more developing. I love ultrawides though, so I guess I'm biased. I would look LG's ultrawide stuff, for 500 bucks they have some nice options.
That card can barely run at 1080p. I would advise you upgrade your GPU before trying to upgrade your monitor.
2 Likes
I like monitors which have panels made in South Korea. For around $100 you can get an entry level 20inchish 1080p panel. Each additional feature that you want will add something to the price. So, for example, if you want an IPS (Inter Planar Switching) Monitor for really great color reproduction, or really fast refresh rate, or 4k resolution, each feature is going to increment your total up. So you don't want to go into this by asking "What can I get for X Dollars"; do some research and choose the features you want.
So the answer to your question depends on which features you want. In this case, it seems your video card needs an upgrade, so your probably better off splitting your investment into an entry level (~$250) card and decent (~$200) monitor, and choose whatever features on the monitor you want. Obviously this is going to depend on what card you get, e.g. getting a gsync card with a gsync monitor. Best of luck with your shopping.
Don't even touch a new monitor before upgrading that GPU. I would suggest getting a 390 and a cheap Korean 1440p monitor which would equal about $550 ish all together.
1 Like
You could get a 4k TN display for around 500, but you may as well save up and step up to an IPS display
What I'd suggest you do if your PSU can handle it is instead get 2-3 1080p IPS displays and up your GPU to something like a 280 which is probably still around $150.
My current monitor is a Acer 23in and I do game at 1920 x 1080 at ultra high settings (for Skyrim and Far Cry 4) and get 30 to 35fps. My gpu is stable at 40c no lag or tarring.
30 fps is just barely passable, most people here would never play anything at that frame rate. Also, pardon me for coming off as a compelte ass, but if you think FarCry 4 is running at ultra without any issues you lack sensory perception, my old r9 285 (twice as powerful) struggled with it at ultra thanks to the 2gb frame buffer it stuttered bad.
1 Like
What's your CPU?
You may want to go with what @SoulFallen said about the 390+1440p monitor
though I'd say go with a 290, they're probably pretty cheap right now
My CPU is FX-6300
16gb of Ram on a ASUS M5A99FX Pro R2.0 Mobo
I actually had one of those in my first byild, definitely powerful enough to handle an upragde in graphics card. All I know is if you spend 500 on some insane 1440p 144hz or 4k monitor without upgrading that gpu you're gonna have a bad time.
Yeah your an ass, lol no not really, I could possibility that I just don't see a difference between 30 and whatever would pass of good fps.
Well it is always good to know what not to do. I thank for that.
There's nothing wrong with being able to play at 30 fps, 40 fps is just fine for me. The issue is 7770 only came in 1gb and 2gb and neither of those are sufficient for over 1080p in newer games which is going to result in it hanging and stuttering especially if you have the 1gb model that wouldn't game anything.
And your power supply is?
SeaSonic S12II 520w
I guess it's a good thing Streeguru asked.
well there's a few options you have
Upgrade the power supply for a 390
Don't overclock ANYTHING if you get a 390
Go Nvidia and get a gtx 970
Well, you could get like a 1440p monitor now, and then just hold off until the Fury Nano comes out which should be in a month or 2 I think. It's supposed to use less power than a 290/x, but give more performance as well.
From:
http://wccftech.com/fast-amd-radeon-r9-nano-find/
"Based on AMD’s latest GPU yet, code named “Fiji”, the R9 Nano boasts some seriously impressive stats. 2X the performance per watt and 2X the performance density of AMD’s previous flagship, the R9 290X. The result is a six inch long, 175W graphics card that we’re told is “significantly faster” than the 290X. Making the R9 Nano the most powerful mini-itx graphics card we’ve seen so far. But, how fast is it exactly ? well, let’s find out !"
You could just get a 970 now as well, but the fury nano looks like the card to get in the coming months if you're willing to wait.
None of the Fury cards will work with DVI-D dual link Korean monitors (almost all of them 300 and below) so that's an instant bump up in price for your monitor. Adapters don't work with them. If you want to go the Nano route you're going to need a Korean monitor with native DisplayPort or native HDMI.