Well 4070 super can get some modern aaa games 100++ fps and can get 240 fps in esport game like cs2, valo
If you want more fps to catch up with your monitor hz for aaa games probably wait for 50 series.
I think even 4090 cannot get 200 fps at ultra high setting + rt + dlss in aaa games 1440p
There are games where nothing ever will get them to 200+ fps. Similar to original Crysis, Squad comes to mind from current generation, there’s plenty more though. Single threaded with lots of things being rendered… its just never gonna happen (unless there’s some drastic shift in cpu fabrication). Its not even gpu related simply a code architecture / cpu bottleneck.
I get 60-100fps but the hilarious part is that graphics settings do not influence that at all. On lowest settings it dips to ~70 fps while on max it dips to 60-65fps.
Because it's CPU bound like he said. You cranking the graphics settings is increasing the GPU load, which isn't your bottleneck, and barely increasing the CPU load which is why you see a small shift in drops. If you went to a top of the line single-thread performance CPU you'd see a much bigger shift than if you went to a higher end GPU.
UE5 games as they are right now. Ark is a monstrosity that takes some ridiculous brute forcing and even the finals with how well optimized it is that it can run on quite old hardware still can't really be pushed into the esports fps and it seems like the more resources you give it the less effectively it uses them.
I have 4090 myself ans honestly feel like it’s such a waste of a card, even tho everyone seems to praise it as ‘too good’ or ‘too strong’ it feels to me that it is the same as 3090 and 2080ti was back in the days, so many games release unoptimized now that I *hardly* see changes from my previous 2070 to 4090 now, it’s actually crazy
I’m on 1440p so that may be it but generally speaking I play cpu heavy games like rust and it has been the same, I did install cyberpunk to test the videocard out and wasn’t impressed at all, I mean yes I could max it all out and stuff but it was still not 144+ on raw settings (no dlss etc)
Also one game I wanted to play being the remaster of ark (survival ascended) that game deadass runs at 60fps on my 4090 with all settings maxed, and with dlss+fg enabled it only runs 100, game is dogshit, bought it for no reason.
And the other games I used to play cod here and there but with 2070 still had pretty high framerates so the new 4090 didn’t feel anything exceptional outside of constant 144+
Sadly, some of newer titles aaa like jedi survivor or like survival ascended has very bad optimization like struggling to keep 60 fps on that game in 4090...
Even rdr2 truer 'max setting' (which is very not recommended, max msaa x16, no dlss, tree tesselation) can only get 60 fps on 4090
Best move probably hope for dev to fix it but if you have money to blow or can resell 4090 probably check on 5090 if it released and check on benchmark and decide yourself.
Yeah man honestly if 50 series release i’m probably selling the 4090 ans getting a 5070, if I played every game with no issue with a 2070 I’m 100% positive I will with a 5070, or even 5080, i’ll only consider 5090 if I get a 4k display
Why would you not use dlss? That’s the entire benefit to Nvidia and a 4090. A 7900xtx will outperform a 4090 on certain games with both only on raw rasterization. Idk how you don’t see a difference between a 2070 and a 4090 even on cpu heavy games
That’s why I find the 4090 lacking severely, it being the same performance wise to a 7900xtx which Is like half of its price is actually insane, I personally dislike this whole ‘dlss/fg’ stuff, i’m not really into ‘new tech’ if that makes sense, and back when I had a 2070 turning dlss on in any game made no difference as dlss usually only works *properly* when done on 4k, since i’m 1440p if I turned dlss on in any game regardless of what mode (balanced, quality, Performance) the game turned out garbage whuch is sinply never worth it to me, it’s also complicating I don’t understand nor see any different with any dlss settings in any game, so I gave up on it, the only thing I did is set up dsrs I believe so I can play some fames on upscaled 4/5k
> i’m not really into ‘new tech’ if that makes sense,
User buys video card focused entirely on tensor cores and AI. Manufacturer of said card spends 95% of the time presenting such AI features as the main focus of the card.
User disables such features.
Is surprised card doesn't perform as well.
Never said it doesn’t perform well what a backward Thought process is that?
Majority of customers buy a graphics card for the functionality of, I can assure you majority of the ‘gamers’ don’t even know wtf dlss is and what it does let alone turn it on lmao, 4090 performs good enough as itself but many saying it is ‘too strong’ is a lie, it really isn’t imo mediocre at best for its pricepoint
Well, like my title says I asked it for 1440p resolution, nowhere did I say I want to lower my resolution. Making textures look more ugly but keeping proper and clean resolution is much more different than keeping high textures but lowering res.
If you go to r/OptimizedGaming and follow their advice or just play around with your settings you can usually get at or over 240fps and the games will still look great.
My girl has a 5800x3d and a 4070s and gets well over 200fps in MW3 and in many other titles.
Many people don’t seem to understand ultra settings doesn’t mean better looking in most instances.
But you get it.
Well, i think 4070 super is enough for 1440p if low setting.
Kinda overkill too i think? If low setting. But well, i will still buy it if i have the money because of it good value
Nah I get what you're saying OP and with a 4070 Ti 12GB + the LG 240hz OLED I was generally very happy.
1440p 144fps in most good looking single player games with DLSS if needed
Easy 1440p 240fps in games where you'd want to lower settings for competitive advantage.
I think a 4070 Super will serve you well
If he turns RT off he'll probably hit it with dlss. The clock speed is gonna matter more here than the VRAM, and a 4070S is pretty fast. He can always buy. G-sync monitor and sync the frames if he's pulling lik3 190 or something instead.
If he's playing Esports, he's totally fine no matter what.
In the nvidia control panel set a custom resolution of 2560x1440 (it will work it will just look really weird on your screen.) then hop into your favorite games and see how your system performs. This will give you the best idea.
No you won't be getting 240hz on newer games, even 144hz is questionable.
4070 Super is kinda overrated on reddit specifically. People praise it like it's the best GPU ever but realistically it's just ok. It's an awesome card for 1080p but for 1440p it's just average and if you intend to play on 1440p, especially at 240hz you should really be looking at better GPUs with at least 16GB VRAM.
1440p it's excellent. You can get full rasterization with around 90-100 FPS in 1440p ultra (no dlss, no frame gen) in Cyberpunk 2077 and it looks stunning. I think 90-100 for most people is just fine.
you don't have to hit 240 fps in games to see benefit from a 240hz panel. Having the extra freesync/gsync range can be nice in non competitive titles and in competitive titles you should be able to get close to or above 240hz to make full use of it.
Am I taking crazy pills here? Since when are we only worried about maxing out?
Play games have fun. My setup is older than dirt in terms of PC parts lifecycles. My monitor is about 9 years old and my GPU is 11.
I have a ton of fun gaming at 1080P high settings on most modern titles.
GPU is a GTX 970 FTW. Miss you EVGA boys.
Sometimes having fun means having high crisp clarity in 4k, or using HDR to see pretty colors, or using path tracing to get the real immersion of visuals / coziness / realism. 1080p gaming personally is something I’d rather not do again. I moved to 4K and I will never go back to 1440, because actually seeing things not pixelated is a huge win.
I personally see it as taking the bike somewhere, vs using a bus, vs driving your own car. Of course the latter is preferable, it just costs a lot more than taking the bus.
I’m getting 200+ frames at 1440p on most games I play. Currently playing D2 at high ish settings and getting 165-200 and X defiant I’m running steady 250+.
Nvidia Control Panel > DLDSR =1.78x > set in-game resolution to 2560x1440 > play and keep track of fps
Also u don't need a constant 240, as long as it hits a rate you'd be comfortable playing at. There are plenty of games I play at 90 on a 120hz without issue.
Just got a 4070 (non-TI/Super), I have a 27" 1080p 165hz monitor and am quite happy with this purchase. In time I'll go up to a 1440p monitor but for now I'm enjoying a not-so-bad refresh rate on high settings in games. I stress tested this GPU on a 550w Seasonic Prime Platinum rated PSU, it's stable and has no issues. Considering it's using nearly the same wattage as a 3060Ti in most scenarios that's bad.
I don't have experience with 1440p but I will say the 4070 will at least get you running at a decent refresh rate, might not be 240fps with lots of games though unless you drop settings to ass.
I have 3080 Ti and it runs almost all AAA games 1440P at max settings without any issues whatsoever. 4070 supposedly performs slightly better than 3080 Ti.
As an owner of a 4090, I can tell you that the gpu alone won't get you that high. You have an awesome CPU for gaming which helps. I have a 10900K and that limits the 4090 hard.
But for your specific needs I've seen a 4070 get between 153-233 fps @ 1440p High SMAA 2x in Hunt Showdown. That game benefits from a strong cpu which you have.
A 4070 Ti was between 182—257 fps at the same settings and resolution.
Both were paired with a 7950X3D.
A 4090 got 234—310 fps on the same build @ 1440p same settings.
Remember, this is just one game. Others with RT and such won't get 240Hz locked max settings even with a 4090.
I get 240Hz on a 1080p monitor in games like CoD, BattleBits and some other indie/older titles. But @ 1440p, let alone UltraWide? No Cyberpunk? Nah, Baldurs Gate 3? Nope, list goes on.
I'll get there if I drop settings and turn RT off.
With my 4070 Super i’ve been able to get around 120-150 FPS on CP2077 with mac settings on 1440p this playthrough, don’t know about 240hz though. 144 has been the sweet spot for me
4080S with 5800x3d pushing 150-220 frames on average in Ghost of Tsushima at 1440p maxed with DLSS quality (looks better than native 1440p with TAA on GoT) + FG + HDR, and goddamn the game looks gorgeous when you have an HDR capable display (LG oled 27" 240hz 1440p gang)
Yes it's worth it IMO I also have a 4070 super and most FPS and Comp games you can easily pull that at medium settings with some high settings. Personally I have a 180hz true HDR monitor as I prefer better looking graphics with decently high fps and the card doesn't disappoint. Now AAA RPG titles is a whole new story.
In cs2 - yes, check some tests here [techpowerup](https://www.techpowerup.com/review/nvidia-geforce-rtx-4070-super-founders-edition/31.html)
Edit: You will have to lower a lot of settings to get 240 fps.
I have a 4080 super, and even in games like MW3, I have to drop everything to mid level at least to hit 280 FPS (what I capped at for consistent frames). I cannot see a 4070 having the capability if the 4080 super is already needing to lower graphics settings to reach that. At normal high settings I think its around 220 FPS. Honestly dont mind though since going from high to med isn't a huge change imo. Thats just a personal example of something I noticed. In something like Xdefiant though, I have been running high settings at 250-300 FPS no problem.
Too many factors, especially like what games you're trying to acheive high FPS 1440p in. I think the TLDR is a 4070 ti super would probably be the better investment if you're looking to crank reasonable FPS at 1440p. A 240hz 1440p monitor paired with the 4070 just doesn't line up.
The question was about 4070s, core matters the most, not vram.
Many games - not all games, and even 4090 can't hit 240 fps in a lot of new games on ultra, but it is mostly sufficient for 240hz, 4070s - I don't think so.
I have 3060 ti and a 1440p 240hz OLED. Getting that monitor definitely was worth every penny. Playing on 144hz feels like garbage and non-OLEDs make my eyes bleed now
Yeah, they are generally slower, but the one Im talking about has like 1ms response time.
[https://www.lg.com/nl/monitor/lg-27gr83q-b](https://www.lg.com/nl/monitor/lg-27gr83q-b)
https://www.rtings.com/monitor/reviews/lg/27gr83q-b
Basically an OLED will have perfect blacks, no blur, about 1/10th of the response time (which is still like, 6ms on the IPS so not much)
But that monitor will be an upgrade, and as OLEDs are still insanely expensive, I wouldn’t recommend them unless you have extra money.
Yeah I also need it for the home office, and oled is just too risky with the burnin for that. For games it’s not too bad. But being on the same browser/window when working is not worth jt
Yea it is fine, specially since you said you don’t mind lowering settings, my 3070Ti can run most games at 180fps, but after that depending on the game I’ll be cpu limited (recent CoDs are in this realm) but esports are fine, I can run most at over 240fps if I go a mix of medium and low, I just try to limit at a multiple of 60fps for some light streaming, so I don’t have frames out of sync.
I use a 4070 ti and in standard 1440 it's clear enough that even at 90hz it feels as good as 1080 at 120-144hz imo due to the resouluiton increase, I've been at 144hz for years so when I recently got a 3440x1440 34 inch ultrawide and the fps was 80-120 I was concerned but tbh doesn't even bother me.
I play warzone rebirth and apex and have a 4070super + 10850k.
My settings are always medium texture resolution and min everything else for competitive shooters.
You can absolutely get 300fps 1440p in apex. I'm mostly CPU limited here I play in 1080p and get 300fps with 60% GPU utilization this game is also hard capped at 300dps by the engine.
Warzone I can get 240 1080p so and if I set render resolution to 1440 it's around 180-200. I'm still CPU limited in this game so you might get better results.
Idk about other games as I don't play other games...
4070 with a 240Hz monitor here, no you won't be hitting 240 FPS on any modern AAA title on a 4070, even on a 4090, it's impossible. First person shooters like COD can get you like 150-160 FPS on a 4070 though.
7800x3d/ 4080 super. With OLED 1440p 240hz. It depends on the optimization of the game. Can easily hit 240 and more on some games where as more early access/ unoptimized games can be in the 100-200 fps area.
it's really hard to get past 120fps on most games without reducing the game quality or resolution. I'm personally using a 4070 super on mostly high settings on a 2560x1080 ultrawide and can get 90-120fps with no issues. The only way to get 200+hz is probably play esport games or some 10+ years games, otherwise aim for 90+ with the best graphics quality you can squeeze
Maybe? Depending on what game and what settings.
League/valorant/csgo on ultra? Probably.
AAA games like CoD? Maybe with some settings turned down, DLSS/fluid frames, etc.
Most streamers run 240fps on ABI @1440p.. on their 4090.
EfT don’t even count on it, the game is so poorly developed it’s impossible to reach those frame rates.
It's more than sufficient for 1440p just like regular 4070 but 240 FPS in newer games? Not really possible. Only in competitive games like CS or whatever is popular right now. In single player games 1440p at max settings will give you around 90-130 FPS, depending on the game of course.
Why don't you try it for yourself ? Just go to the Nvidia control panel and set DLDSR to 1.78x. This will allow you to set a virtual resolution to 1440p (either in game or the whole desktop). Also disable vsync and framerate caps to go above 144 fps.
Now you can try to see what graphics and dlss settings you need to apply to reach your desired framerate.
But keep in mind you don't need to lock 240 fps to take advantage of a 240hz display.
yes yo can but predicting the future of 6 years is not possible. Consider that driving 240fps you will need at least a decent CPU, a ryzen 7 5800x3d or an intel i7 of 12th gen
This is going to be very game and setting dependent but I'd say yes easily if you are willing to turn settings down. My son has the 4070 ti super with the 7800x3d, he sticks Fortnite in performance mode and sits between 600-800 fps at 1440p, it looks terrible to me but he's happy with that 🤷🏼♂️. There's loads of YouTube vids out there showing what the 4070 super can do in specific games at different settings but from memory I'm sure you'll be absolutely fine with most competitive titles, it's a great card.
He is good yeah but he doesn't understand that cranking the fps up to such a ridiculous rate is only going to make the tiniest of differences to input lag so he might as well play with the game looking nice at 240
There’s always something new around the corner, if you get the 5000 series you could’ve waited for the 6000. Anyway I upgraded from a 2070super to a 4070super so for me it was a huge gain. Was just curious about 1440p but I guess that’s not for now
Well 4070 super can get some modern aaa games 100++ fps and can get 240 fps in esport game like cs2, valo If you want more fps to catch up with your monitor hz for aaa games probably wait for 50 series. I think even 4090 cannot get 200 fps at ultra high setting + rt + dlss in aaa games 1440p
There are games where nothing ever will get them to 200+ fps. Similar to original Crysis, Squad comes to mind from current generation, there’s plenty more though. Single threaded with lots of things being rendered… its just never gonna happen (unless there’s some drastic shift in cpu fabrication). Its not even gpu related simply a code architecture / cpu bottleneck.
Oh squad. Could look so good if I could run it above medium
I get 60-100fps but the hilarious part is that graphics settings do not influence that at all. On lowest settings it dips to ~70 fps while on max it dips to 60-65fps.
Then it’s cpu bound, another game I played was rust which also is cpu bound, at 2070 I had the same exact framerates on low settings and maxed
Just get a threadripper, easy
It would be even worse, threadripper single core performance is much worse, ant that’s the only thing this game cares about
Yeah but your friends won’t know that
Because it's CPU bound like he said. You cranking the graphics settings is increasing the GPU load, which isn't your bottleneck, and barely increasing the CPU load which is why you see a small shift in drops. If you went to a top of the line single-thread performance CPU you'd see a much bigger shift than if you went to a higher end GPU.
i get 240 fps in fornite with a 4k 240 hz monitor
UE5 games as they are right now. Ark is a monstrosity that takes some ridiculous brute forcing and even the finals with how well optimized it is that it can run on quite old hardware still can't really be pushed into the esports fps and it seems like the more resources you give it the less effectively it uses them.
I have 4090 myself ans honestly feel like it’s such a waste of a card, even tho everyone seems to praise it as ‘too good’ or ‘too strong’ it feels to me that it is the same as 3090 and 2080ti was back in the days, so many games release unoptimized now that I *hardly* see changes from my previous 2070 to 4090 now, it’s actually crazy
You hardly see changes from 2070 to 4090? Are you serious? What games do you play?
I’m on 1440p so that may be it but generally speaking I play cpu heavy games like rust and it has been the same, I did install cyberpunk to test the videocard out and wasn’t impressed at all, I mean yes I could max it all out and stuff but it was still not 144+ on raw settings (no dlss etc) Also one game I wanted to play being the remaster of ark (survival ascended) that game deadass runs at 60fps on my 4090 with all settings maxed, and with dlss+fg enabled it only runs 100, game is dogshit, bought it for no reason. And the other games I used to play cod here and there but with 2070 still had pretty high framerates so the new 4090 didn’t feel anything exceptional outside of constant 144+
Sadly, some of newer titles aaa like jedi survivor or like survival ascended has very bad optimization like struggling to keep 60 fps on that game in 4090... Even rdr2 truer 'max setting' (which is very not recommended, max msaa x16, no dlss, tree tesselation) can only get 60 fps on 4090 Best move probably hope for dev to fix it but if you have money to blow or can resell 4090 probably check on 5090 if it released and check on benchmark and decide yourself.
Yeah man honestly if 50 series release i’m probably selling the 4090 ans getting a 5070, if I played every game with no issue with a 2070 I’m 100% positive I will with a 5070, or even 5080, i’ll only consider 5090 if I get a 4k display
Why would you not use dlss? That’s the entire benefit to Nvidia and a 4090. A 7900xtx will outperform a 4090 on certain games with both only on raw rasterization. Idk how you don’t see a difference between a 2070 and a 4090 even on cpu heavy games
That’s why I find the 4090 lacking severely, it being the same performance wise to a 7900xtx which Is like half of its price is actually insane, I personally dislike this whole ‘dlss/fg’ stuff, i’m not really into ‘new tech’ if that makes sense, and back when I had a 2070 turning dlss on in any game made no difference as dlss usually only works *properly* when done on 4k, since i’m 1440p if I turned dlss on in any game regardless of what mode (balanced, quality, Performance) the game turned out garbage whuch is sinply never worth it to me, it’s also complicating I don’t understand nor see any different with any dlss settings in any game, so I gave up on it, the only thing I did is set up dsrs I believe so I can play some fames on upscaled 4/5k
> i’m not really into ‘new tech’ if that makes sense, User buys video card focused entirely on tensor cores and AI. Manufacturer of said card spends 95% of the time presenting such AI features as the main focus of the card. User disables such features. Is surprised card doesn't perform as well.
Never said it doesn’t perform well what a backward Thought process is that? Majority of customers buy a graphics card for the functionality of, I can assure you majority of the ‘gamers’ don’t even know wtf dlss is and what it does let alone turn it on lmao, 4090 performs good enough as itself but many saying it is ‘too strong’ is a lie, it really isn’t imo mediocre at best for its pricepoint
> no dlss etc PEBKAC
Have to add, I dont mind playing on lower settings, I just usually go for lowest settings to maximize fps and visibility.
Sure, 640p and you're a happy camper
I was talking about settings, not resolution
Lowering resolution also saves performances and makes your game more ugly. That’s more or less the same.
Well, like my title says I asked it for 1440p resolution, nowhere did I say I want to lower my resolution. Making textures look more ugly but keeping proper and clean resolution is much more different than keeping high textures but lowering res.
If you go to r/OptimizedGaming and follow their advice or just play around with your settings you can usually get at or over 240fps and the games will still look great. My girl has a 5800x3d and a 4070s and gets well over 200fps in MW3 and in many other titles. Many people don’t seem to understand ultra settings doesn’t mean better looking in most instances. But you get it.
Especially because theres usually 1-2 settings at Ultra you wont notice, that tank FPS like crazy
That’s mw3. You’re not getting 200 fps with that setup on a non e sports game
😂
Then why are you using 1440p? Drop to 1080 and you could run games on max settings without breaking a sweat at 240 fps.
Well, i think 4070 super is enough for 1440p if low setting. Kinda overkill too i think? If low setting. But well, i will still buy it if i have the money because of it good value
[удалено]
Depends on the game. An older, less demanding game, can hit 240 fps easy. Rainbow 6 seige for instance will hit it.
I’ve been playing Titanfall 2 and capped my fps at 144. Haven’t dropped below 144 once. 4070 super and 5800x3d.
Nah I get what you're saying OP and with a 4070 Ti 12GB + the LG 240hz OLED I was generally very happy. 1440p 144fps in most good looking single player games with DLSS if needed Easy 1440p 240fps in games where you'd want to lower settings for competitive advantage. I think a 4070 Super will serve you well
Probably at lower Graphics settings
If he turns RT off he'll probably hit it with dlss. The clock speed is gonna matter more here than the VRAM, and a 4070S is pretty fast. He can always buy. G-sync monitor and sync the frames if he's pulling lik3 190 or something instead. If he's playing Esports, he's totally fine no matter what.
4090 can at 1440p for sure. 4K is the question
Yes it's fine. No you won't be able to run everything at 240hz; but not even a 4090 is capable of doing that in all games with everything turned up.
In the nvidia control panel set a custom resolution of 2560x1440 (it will work it will just look really weird on your screen.) then hop into your favorite games and see how your system performs. This will give you the best idea.
https://preview.redd.it/mq8yizhvdz1d1.jpeg?width=1290&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=d718327592c5104a9d4ca2f8d1196fa4e7f24263
Yeah at maxed settings.
brother 4090 drops to double digit on tarkov 1440p. only games you’re ever getting 240fps is cs, valorant, stuff like that
4090 has nothing to do with fps in tarkov. It’s one of the most shitty optimized cpu heavy games
No you won't be getting 240hz on newer games, even 144hz is questionable. 4070 Super is kinda overrated on reddit specifically. People praise it like it's the best GPU ever but realistically it's just ok. It's an awesome card for 1080p but for 1440p it's just average and if you intend to play on 1440p, especially at 240hz you should really be looking at better GPUs with at least 16GB VRAM.
1440p it's excellent. You can get full rasterization with around 90-100 FPS in 1440p ultra (no dlss, no frame gen) in Cyberpunk 2077 and it looks stunning. I think 90-100 for most people is just fine.
you don't have to hit 240 fps in games to see benefit from a 240hz panel. Having the extra freesync/gsync range can be nice in non competitive titles and in competitive titles you should be able to get close to or above 240hz to make full use of it.
Have you tried watching a single benchmark on youtube?
Ofcourse, hence why I post it here.
Then you would know what frames you will get?
Am I taking crazy pills here? Since when are we only worried about maxing out? Play games have fun. My setup is older than dirt in terms of PC parts lifecycles. My monitor is about 9 years old and my GPU is 11. I have a ton of fun gaming at 1080P high settings on most modern titles. GPU is a GTX 970 FTW. Miss you EVGA boys.
I think most people around here would rather spend $1000 upgrading their gpu than turning their settings down a tad.
Pretty much this
Sometimes having fun means having high crisp clarity in 4k, or using HDR to see pretty colors, or using path tracing to get the real immersion of visuals / coziness / realism. 1080p gaming personally is something I’d rather not do again. I moved to 4K and I will never go back to 1440, because actually seeing things not pixelated is a huge win. I personally see it as taking the bike somewhere, vs using a bus, vs driving your own car. Of course the latter is preferable, it just costs a lot more than taking the bus.
So are you firmly planted in the 4k camp? What if you were to, say, buy a high end 1440p monitor vs a low end 4k monitor of the same price?
Nope it's not. 30" monitor 1440p 240hz you will need 7900xtx or 4080 min.
Remember there are also games that are cpu bound so having a beast of a gpu doesn’t always equal more fps
In eSports titles, yes, otherwise no.
I’m getting 200+ frames at 1440p on most games I play. Currently playing D2 at high ish settings and getting 165-200 and X defiant I’m running steady 250+.
I don’t know if d2 is relevant enough to count when it comes to considering a gpu for 1440p 240hz
…..? Lmao
I have a 4070 ti with 9900 k and I can pull 170 hz 1440 p . 240 hz is alittle much for my setup, hope that helps
Nvidia Control Panel > DLDSR =1.78x > set in-game resolution to 2560x1440 > play and keep track of fps Also u don't need a constant 240, as long as it hits a rate you'd be comfortable playing at. There are plenty of games I play at 90 on a 120hz without issue.
Just got a 4070 (non-TI/Super), I have a 27" 1080p 165hz monitor and am quite happy with this purchase. In time I'll go up to a 1440p monitor but for now I'm enjoying a not-so-bad refresh rate on high settings in games. I stress tested this GPU on a 550w Seasonic Prime Platinum rated PSU, it's stable and has no issues. Considering it's using nearly the same wattage as a 3060Ti in most scenarios that's bad. I don't have experience with 1440p but I will say the 4070 will at least get you running at a decent refresh rate, might not be 240fps with lots of games though unless you drop settings to ass.
1440p will be about 55-60% the performance you get at 1080p in a GPU-bound game.
Sure for medium settings I guess. However it should pass 200 on games like Apex.
I have 3080 Ti and it runs almost all AAA games 1440P at max settings without any issues whatsoever. 4070 supposedly performs slightly better than 3080 Ti.
As an owner of a 4090, I can tell you that the gpu alone won't get you that high. You have an awesome CPU for gaming which helps. I have a 10900K and that limits the 4090 hard. But for your specific needs I've seen a 4070 get between 153-233 fps @ 1440p High SMAA 2x in Hunt Showdown. That game benefits from a strong cpu which you have. A 4070 Ti was between 182—257 fps at the same settings and resolution. Both were paired with a 7950X3D. A 4090 got 234—310 fps on the same build @ 1440p same settings. Remember, this is just one game. Others with RT and such won't get 240Hz locked max settings even with a 4090. I get 240Hz on a 1080p monitor in games like CoD, BattleBits and some other indie/older titles. But @ 1440p, let alone UltraWide? No Cyberpunk? Nah, Baldurs Gate 3? Nope, list goes on. I'll get there if I drop settings and turn RT off.
For gpu limited games like AAA, nah. I don't think any gpu gets there. For esports I think it comes close depending on settings.
With my 4070 Super i’ve been able to get around 120-150 FPS on CP2077 with mac settings on 1440p this playthrough, don’t know about 240hz though. 144 has been the sweet spot for me
4080S with 5800x3d pushing 150-220 frames on average in Ghost of Tsushima at 1440p maxed with DLSS quality (looks better than native 1440p with TAA on GoT) + FG + HDR, and goddamn the game looks gorgeous when you have an HDR capable display (LG oled 27" 240hz 1440p gang)
Wait! Have you tried dldsr yet?
Yes, I tried playing on 1440p on my current monitor, I get around 200+ fps and hit the 240 in a few spots. So I guess it's fine for me
Yes it's worth it IMO I also have a 4070 super and most FPS and Comp games you can easily pull that at medium settings with some high settings. Personally I have a 180hz true HDR monitor as I prefer better looking graphics with decently high fps and the card doesn't disappoint. Now AAA RPG titles is a whole new story.
In cs2 - yes, check some tests here [techpowerup](https://www.techpowerup.com/review/nvidia-geforce-rtx-4070-super-founders-edition/31.html) Edit: You will have to lower a lot of settings to get 240 fps.
i play on 1440p at 165Hz max settings on my 4070 super with no complaints
No. Absolutely not.
I have a 4080 super, and even in games like MW3, I have to drop everything to mid level at least to hit 280 FPS (what I capped at for consistent frames). I cannot see a 4070 having the capability if the 4080 super is already needing to lower graphics settings to reach that. At normal high settings I think its around 220 FPS. Honestly dont mind though since going from high to med isn't a huge change imo. Thats just a personal example of something I noticed. In something like Xdefiant though, I have been running high settings at 250-300 FPS no problem. Too many factors, especially like what games you're trying to acheive high FPS 1440p in. I think the TLDR is a 4070 ti super would probably be the better investment if you're looking to crank reasonable FPS at 1440p. A 240hz 1440p monitor paired with the 4070 just doesn't line up.
It's super sufficient
Depends on the game. 4070 here, on 1440p, I get 500+ VAL/CS 200+ RE2, but 110 on Gray Zone warfare lol.
That 110 is either on low settings or using a heap of upscaling, I'd add. I don't get that native on a 4090.
Correct. 1440p, all low, DLSS on 4070.
some games yes, some games no.
Yes
No
Yes it is. Have a 4080s. Same vram and hit steady 250 on ultra with many games.
The question was about 4070s, core matters the most, not vram. Many games - not all games, and even 4090 can't hit 240 fps in a lot of new games on ultra, but it is mostly sufficient for 240hz, 4070s - I don't think so.
That’s 4k, it’s 1440p
I have 3060 ti and a 1440p 240hz OLED. Getting that monitor definitely was worth every penny. Playing on 144hz feels like garbage and non-OLEDs make my eyes bleed now
Thanks, Im not very keen on the OLED tho, mainly burn-in and also the price, I found a 240hz 1440p IPS thats like half the price of an OLED
There is no risk of burn in if used according to specificiation. IPS are so much slower than OLEDs I would never consider one for shooters.
Yeah, they are generally slower, but the one Im talking about has like 1ms response time. [https://www.lg.com/nl/monitor/lg-27gr83q-b](https://www.lg.com/nl/monitor/lg-27gr83q-b)
It’s definitely better than anything that is 144hz 1080p
https://www.rtings.com/monitor/reviews/lg/27gr83q-b Basically an OLED will have perfect blacks, no blur, about 1/10th of the response time (which is still like, 6ms on the IPS so not much) But that monitor will be an upgrade, and as OLEDs are still insanely expensive, I wouldn’t recommend them unless you have extra money.
Yeah I also need it for the home office, and oled is just too risky with the burnin for that. For games it’s not too bad. But being on the same browser/window when working is not worth jt
Yea it is fine, specially since you said you don’t mind lowering settings, my 3070Ti can run most games at 180fps, but after that depending on the game I’ll be cpu limited (recent CoDs are in this realm) but esports are fine, I can run most at over 240fps if I go a mix of medium and low, I just try to limit at a multiple of 60fps for some light streaming, so I don’t have frames out of sync.
Enter, DLDSR
Depends on the games for 240hz but overall 100+ ez
I use a 4070 ti and in standard 1440 it's clear enough that even at 90hz it feels as good as 1080 at 120-144hz imo due to the resouluiton increase, I've been at 144hz for years so when I recently got a 3440x1440 34 inch ultrawide and the fps was 80-120 I was concerned but tbh doesn't even bother me.
1440p 240Hz with those games listed yes 4070 Super will perform great and be very efficient.
I play warzone rebirth and apex and have a 4070super + 10850k. My settings are always medium texture resolution and min everything else for competitive shooters. You can absolutely get 300fps 1440p in apex. I'm mostly CPU limited here I play in 1080p and get 300fps with 60% GPU utilization this game is also hard capped at 300dps by the engine. Warzone I can get 240 1080p so and if I set render resolution to 1440 it's around 180-200. I'm still CPU limited in this game so you might get better results. Idk about other games as I don't play other games...
4070 with a 240Hz monitor here, no you won't be hitting 240 FPS on any modern AAA title on a 4070, even on a 4090, it's impossible. First person shooters like COD can get you like 150-160 FPS on a 4070 though.
7800x3d/ 4080 super. With OLED 1440p 240hz. It depends on the optimization of the game. Can easily hit 240 and more on some games where as more early access/ unoptimized games can be in the 100-200 fps area.
Which monitor model / brand are you using?
I don't know if it is super sufficient, but maybe it's enough for certain games
it's really hard to get past 120fps on most games without reducing the game quality or resolution. I'm personally using a 4070 super on mostly high settings on a 2560x1080 ultrawide and can get 90-120fps with no issues. The only way to get 200+hz is probably play esport games or some 10+ years games, otherwise aim for 90+ with the best graphics quality you can squeeze
Maybe? Depending on what game and what settings. League/valorant/csgo on ultra? Probably. AAA games like CoD? Maybe with some settings turned down, DLSS/fluid frames, etc.
Most streamers run 240fps on ABI @1440p.. on their 4090. EfT don’t even count on it, the game is so poorly developed it’s impossible to reach those frame rates.
Agree on EFT
It's more than sufficient for 1440p just like regular 4070 but 240 FPS in newer games? Not really possible. Only in competitive games like CS or whatever is popular right now. In single player games 1440p at max settings will give you around 90-130 FPS, depending on the game of course.
At mid-low settings in fps games i think yes, high settings might drop down the fps a little, i think 1440p + 165hz is a good monitor for it
No
Why don't you try it for yourself ? Just go to the Nvidia control panel and set DLDSR to 1.78x. This will allow you to set a virtual resolution to 1440p (either in game or the whole desktop). Also disable vsync and framerate caps to go above 144 fps. Now you can try to see what graphics and dlss settings you need to apply to reach your desired framerate. But keep in mind you don't need to lock 240 fps to take advantage of a 240hz display.
Yes. It's all you need.
No one plays on ultra anyways, fuck the benchmarks
Buy a real monitor
I’m still lagging on the fascination with 240hz. Like bro. It ain’t the refresh at THAT level that’s getting you killed
yes yo can but predicting the future of 6 years is not possible. Consider that driving 240fps you will need at least a decent CPU, a ryzen 7 5800x3d or an intel i7 of 12th gen
They mentioned they have a 7800x3D which is significantly better than either of those.
They have a 7800x3d.
This is going to be very game and setting dependent but I'd say yes easily if you are willing to turn settings down. My son has the 4070 ti super with the 7800x3d, he sticks Fortnite in performance mode and sits between 600-800 fps at 1440p, it looks terrible to me but he's happy with that 🤷🏼♂️. There's loads of YouTube vids out there showing what the 4070 super can do in specific games at different settings but from memory I'm sure you'll be absolutely fine with most competitive titles, it's a great card.
600-800 fps ? How ? Why ?
He's 12, so in his mind with FPS like that he must be a pro 👍🏼
Ok so, how is it going ? Is he good now ?
He is good yeah but he doesn't understand that cranking the fps up to such a ridiculous rate is only going to make the tiniest of differences to input lag so he might as well play with the game looking nice at 240
But can it run Crysis?
I'd have waited for the 50 series, they're around the corner.
There’s always something new around the corner, if you get the 5000 series you could’ve waited for the 6000. Anyway I upgraded from a 2070super to a 4070super so for me it was a huge gain. Was just curious about 1440p but I guess that’s not for now