Help needed with building a computer that can handle 4k 3D @ high to ultra settings

Discussion in 'General Hardware' started by guitarlifter, Dec 2, 2014.

  1. guitarlifter

    guitarlifter Guest

    Messages:
    3
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    N/A
    Hello, all. I am here to find some help on what parts I should get in order to build a PC that can play most games at high to ultra settings in 4k and even 3D. I already have a 4k 3D TV.

    Ok, so here are my thoughts. I have already bought the following:

    Ram: 16 GB 1866 DDR3 Ram

    Case: ATX-compliant case

    Motherboard: newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813128514 (This is where I maybe should have gotten a different motherboard)

    PSU: newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16817438030 850 watt power supply SLI/Crossfile ready

    SSD: newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820147193 256GB SSD

    Disk Drive: Does it matter? lol I got a BDXL 3D rewritable drive

    Anyhow, I'm on somewhat of a budget. I'm not wanting to go hog wild here, but I do have a decent amount to spend. I'm first wondering what motherboard, CPU, and GPU(s) I will want to get in order to achieve high to max settings for 4k resolution (with some 3D).

    16 GB Ram at 1866 speed is perfectly find, I think. That shouldn't bottleneck anything. Correct me if I am wrong.

    It looks like, for video card(s), I might want to go with one or two 970 GTXs because of their post and cost efficiency. The 980 GTX just doesn't seem to warrant the extra cost. Am I wrong on this? And would I want to go with one or two? I am thinking I might want to do two, but I'd like to hear some more input on what GPU(s) I should be looking at.

    Next, I have some questions about PCI express 2.0 vs 3.0. Would I want a motherboard that has 2.0 or 3.0? The current one I just bought has two PCIe 2.0 x16 slots. Would I want a motherboard that has two PCIe 3.0 x16 slots? Or would the bandwidth not be maxed out even with two 970 GTXs in SLI? This is where cost comes into play. If I need the 3.0 x16, that means I'm probably going to have to go with Intel processors as well as return my current motherboard for a more expensive Intel motherboard. Also, whenever someone does SLI with two cards, does all of the memory get used through one PCIe slot or is it still two? Like, for example, if I bought a motherboard that had one PCIe 3.0 x16 slot and one PCIe 3.0 X8 slot, would that matter, or would I want one with TWO PCIe 3.0 x16 slots?

    Now, IF I can get away with my current AMD motherboard WITHOUT sacrificing much if any performance, I was thinking of getting the AMD FX-9590. Would that processor be fine for high to max settings in 4k assuming my current motherboard (or some other AMD motherboard if there is another one you guys would recommend) and one to two 970 GTXs would be fine?

    Now, IF I do need to go to Intel, I was thinking about the i7-4790k or i7-5280k for a processor. It looks like, if I can, I'd like to go with the i7-4790k because the i7-5280k would require a lot more expenses like a really expensive motherboard (x99) and really expensive, DDR4 ram plus the extra cost of the i7-5280k. One thing I didn't know about until recently (I'm fairly newbie-ish at building computers) is how your Intel processor can limit your video cards beyond just its speed because of these lane things? Does this happen with AMD too? Because of this, would I want one processor over another because of this? I just want two cards in SLI like the 970 GTXs without bottlenecking them because of both PCIe 2.0 x16 slots OR my CPU lanes (whatever those are).

    Sowhat should I do? What graphics cards, motherboard, and CPU should I go with in order to get good framerates at 4k while being on high to ultra settings?
     
  2. hussein19891

    hussein19891 Guest

    Messages:
    18
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    Gtx 870m
    I'd go with the i7 4790k and probably a gtx 970. It wouldn't be capable of handling 4k Gaming, but nothing is at this point in time.
     
  3. guitarlifter

    guitarlifter Guest

    Messages:
    3
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    N/A
    But then why do I see people talk about getting workable framerates at 4k for gaming even with pretty high settings or even ultra? I don't expect this build to max out Crysis 3 at max settings at 4k, but I would like to be able to get respectable framerates for most games at fairly high settings.
     
  4. biggerx

    biggerx Guest

    Messages:
    3,587
    Likes Received:
    11
    GPU:
    EVGA RTX 3070 FTW
    Maybe they're talking about SLI?
     

  5. hussein19891

    hussein19891 Guest

    Messages:
    18
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    Gtx 870m
    Personally I wouldn't bother until single GPU solutions are capable of handling the latest titles at 4k. SLI and Crossfire are hit and miss.
     
  6. fantaskarsef

    fantaskarsef Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    15,636
    Likes Received:
    9,512
    GPU:
    4090@H2O
    Well, for 4k gaming I'd go with at least two GPUs, and with a third one the troubles of SLI/CFX only increase...

    I guess you'll be fine with the 4790K if it's gaming you'll do, since with the PCIe lanes it holds as follows: the difference between 16x and 8x PCIe 3.0 are not really hampering you for the moment. There's very little impact on single GPU graphics cards at the moment with PCIe 3.0 slots.
    16/16 - 1% - 16/8 and 16/8 - 1% - 8/8, with only two or three percent of performance lost between 16/16 and 8/8 SLI (in case you want to go 970 SLI). The same goes with PCIe 2.0, since 16x PCIe 2.0 equals 8x PCIe 3.0, which is sufficient. I don't know how it behaves with x8 PCIe 2.0, there you might see some bottlenecking, hence I personally, if you have the budget, would go for PCIe 3.0. With the mainboard you noted (GA-990FXA-UD3), you'll be okay as long as you stick to only two GPUs, with three or four you will likely see some PCIe bottlenecking (PCIe 2.0 x4!)

    DDR 3 or 4 doesn't make that much of a difference for gaming I think, but I'm not sure on that (if you plan on going for the 5820K despite the extra price for little gain on a gaming only rig for 150-200% the price).

    Hope that helped and I didn't talk too much rubbish :p
     
  7. guitarlifter

    guitarlifter Guest

    Messages:
    3
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    N/A
    Probably, but I'm willing to do that if that's necessary.
     
  8. sykozis

    sykozis Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    22,492
    Likes Received:
    1,537
    GPU:
    Asus RX6700XT
    If you want to use "Ultra" settings, you're looking at Tri-SLI in most cases. 4K gaming isn't worth it at this point.
     
  9. TekkMarine

    TekkMarine Maha Guru

    Messages:
    1,375
    Likes Received:
    23
    GPU:
    EVGA 980Ti GTX SC
    This.

    & when will that be?
     
  10. -Tj-

    -Tj- Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    18,095
    Likes Received:
    2,601
    GPU:
    3080TI iChill Black
    Not anytime soon, next high end gpus aka BermudaXT & GM200 will be still too slow, maybe if you buy 2.


    Then there is proper next gen stuff in Q2-Q4 2015 that will raise the bar higher.. I would say in year 2017 one high-end gpu will be enough @ 4k and 60fps, probably.
     

  11. Valken

    Valken Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    2,922
    Likes Received:
    903
    GPU:
    Forsa 1060 3GB Temp GPU
    I would wait due to the below:

    Original link

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]

    Those are three game engines are probably the most demanding and barely keep up at 60 FPS in 4K. can probably do it by turning down some settings but waiting even for the next gen to come out will help with more performance.

    Nvidia has not released their "Ti" cards yet and AMD is rumored to have new gpus by next quarter.
     

Share This Page