Upgrading to 1440 monitor

Always get the "itch" to upgrade my system every few years. Playing DCS almost exclusively the last 6 months.

I currently have i5 4760K so there's no easy upgrade path without changing out the whole motherboard. I have 24G RAM.

Video card is a GTX 1060 6GB and it runs everything on my current 24" 1080p monitor quite nicely.

Thinking about a 27in 1440 monitor, and I realize that there will be a negative effect on gameplay with my current card. Cheapest option would be a 1070ti on sale for under $400 at New Egg.

Questions:

1. Most of the monitors I'm looking at advertise a 144Hz refresh rate. What is the utility of a 144Hz monitor if your card can only put out 80 FPS?

2. The combination will cost me about $750. Is the 1080 to 1440 upgrade worth it?

What do you think?

I upgraded from 1080p to 1440p about a year ago. The increase in resolution is really amazing and has many benefits; however, it comes at a significant cost. Your 1060 will struggle unless you turn down in games setting significantly. I have a 1080 Ti and drop below 60 FPS in some situations with the below in-game settings.

My monitor has a 144Hz refresh rate and as you probably already know, it's completely useless to me and far as I can tell. Also, I have had to limit my FPS to 60 to support the TrackIR refresh rate of 120Hz...120 FPS is not achievable either in DCS with high settings, hence the limit to 60 FPS. So, 1440p is great and I highly recommend it over 1080p but it will need significant hardware to support it and to me, any monitor with a refresh rate over 60Hz is useless for me right now because of TrackIR and the struggle to maintain 60 FPS at all times.

Hopefully Vulkan API and optimization of the Hornet will increases overall performance and FPS but until then, it's a struggle.

I have had to limit my FPS to 60 to support the TrackIR refresh rate of 120Hz...120 FPS is not achievable either in DCS with high settings, hence the limit to 60 FPS. So, 1440p is great and I highly recommend it over 1080p but it will need significant hardware to support it and to me, any monitor with a refresh rate over 60Hz is useless for me right now because of TrackIR and the struggle to maintain 60 FPS at all times.

 

Hopefully Vulkan API and optimization of the Hornet will increases overall performance and FPS but until then, it's a struggle.

Brian, your information is not correct. I usually game and flight sim on my big screen in 4K unless I'm playing a first person shooter, but I've tested DCS multiple times on my ASUS 27" 166Mhz. Track IR works like butter above 60fps. I can easily hit 166 fps at 1080p and usually in the 120s to 130s over complex areas in 1440p.

I just took some benchmarks last night as I just bought a 2080Ti and wanted to calculate the performance bump for a DCS build log I'm working on. Averages flying the TF-51 in the "Flight over Tbilisi" and and Nevada Free Flight (the Vegas Strip) were 129.35 fps and 134.83 fps respectively on a Titan Xp on the "high" preset. A well tuned 1080 Ti is a really close match to a Titan Xp in most games, some games even get higher FPS on a 1080 Ti. DCS specific I don't know as I've never tested a 1080 Ti on my rig. But panning around with my TrackIR is like butter.

For the OP, obviously you won't get those kind of frames on a 1070 Ti but the potential is there when your system is properly tuned. A 1070 Ti on sale at Newegg is probably your best purchase right now in terms of performance per dollar. DCS will push your system as hard or harder than any AAA game on the market. However, I would suggest prioritizing the monitor over the card. A monitor is a much better long term investment and won't become obsolescent so fast. You can always get a better card later and you will be future proofed. A good card w/o a good monitor is kind of putting the cart before the horse. A Gsync monitor can help mitigate frame rate drops and frame time fluctuations for your 1060. I would suggest the ASUS 27" 166Hz Gsync. Best gaming monitor I have ever owned hands down. You could also use it for CC if you want as the colors are very accurate. I know the price dropped recently from when I bought one and there is probably a good sale on right now.

Early access modules and Early access maps are not a good metric for performance testing and benchmarks. They change with every new OB build. To properly judge performance you need to play a mature module on the two maps that are out of early access, Nevada and Caucasus.

Speaking of Vulcan. I also ran a benchmark last night that compares API's on your rig. The performance difference between DX11 and Vulcan was like night and day. Hopefully a Vulcan build gets pushed out some time this next year, but another flight sim is also currently working on converting their engine and code to Vulcan. It's taking a long time.

Brian, your information is not correct. I usually game and flight sim on my big screen in 4K unless I'm playing a first person shooter, but I've tested DCS multiple times on my ASUS 27" 166Mhz. Track IR works like butter above 60fps. I can easily hit 166 fps at 1080p and usually in the 120s to 130s over complex areas in 1440p.

 

I just took some benchmarks last night as I just bought a 2080Ti and wanted to calculate the performance bump for a DCS build log I'm working on. Averages flying the TF-51 in the "Flight over Tbilisi" and and Nevada Free Flight (the Vegas Strip) were 129.35 fps and 134.83 fps respectively on a Titan Xp on the "high" preset. A well tuned 1080 Ti is a really close match to a Titan Xp in most games, some games even get higher FPS on a 1080 Ti. DCS specific I don't know as I've never tested a 1080 Ti on my rig. But panning around with my TrackIR is like butter.

 

For the OP, obviously you won't get those kind of frames on a 1070 Ti but the potential is there when your system is properly tuned. A 1070 Ti on sale at Newegg is probably your best purchase right now in terms of performance per dollar. DCS will push your system as hard or harder than any AAA game on the market. However, I would suggest prioritizing the monitor over the card. A monitor is a much better long term investment and won't become obsolescent so fast. You can always get a better card later and you will be future proofed. A good card w/o a good monitor is kind of putting the cart before the horse. A Gsync monitor can help mitigate frame rate drops and frame time fluctuations for your 1060. I would suggest the ASUS 27" 166Hz Gsync. Best gaming monitor I have ever owned hands down. You could also use it for CC if you want as the colors are very accurate. I know the price dropped recently from when I bought one and there is probably a good sale on right now.

 

Early access modules and Early access maps are not a good metric for performance testing and benchmarks. They change with every new OB build. To properly judge performance you need to play a mature module on the two maps that are out of early access, Nevada and Caucasus.

 

Speaking of Vulcan. I also ran a benchmark last night that compares API's on your rig. The performance difference between DX11 and Vulcan was like night and day. Hopefully a Vulcan build gets pushed out some time this next year, but another flight sim is also currently working on converting their engine and code to Vulcan. It's taking a long time.

Well, I read my post again and I should have been a little more specific. My results are with the Hornet only and I have not flown any other module to test how they perform on my system. The FPS and performance information that I have given though is indeed correct for me and what I am seeing each time I fly the Hornet. Now sure, when I set my FPS to unlimited, I will see it climb to 120's-140's (with CPU and GPU loads nearing 100% at times) if I look in the direction of open sky, water, or desert but as soon as I look towards or fly over a congested area, average FPS will drop to 70's-80's with the occasional dips below 60. There is no way at anytime while flying the Hornet with my system and in game settings that I could sustain anything near my 144Hz refresh rate. I could of course lower my settings but I paid a lot of money to finally get DCS looking good with high graphics settings so I will live with the reduction in FPS.

As for TrackIR...I first read on the forums about stutters when FPS was not 120 or 60 but didn't think I had issues until I tested it out and boy was I surprised...I never noticed the stutters until I limited my FPS to 60 and panning my head around was very noticeably smoother. Another benefit of limiting my FPS is that my CPU and GPU loads are cut in half and not spiking to 100% anymore.

Your comments on Vulkan are encouraging and I hope we see it soon. Apparently it is in internal testing by ED.

So...to the OP...as you can see, there are a lot of variables that will determine if you will benefit from a 1440p 144Hz monitor but at the very least, get the best GPU that you can afford.

I was skeptical because you have a Gsync panel similar to mine, but I was able to replicate your issue in the Free Flight over Dubai. It's definitely the Hornet and the Gulf Map. Microstutter and frametime issues around 70-80fps especially when looking backwards in the cockpit. Take the TF-51 for a spin on the Gulf Map without the frame rate cap and with Vsync on and you'll see what it's supposed to look like. High frame rates, butter

The A-10C had sleight stutter on the Gulf Map but not as bad as the Hornet. A-10 on the Vegas map, no stutter.

Putting the TrackIR in precision mode can help too but for some people this could make it worse.

Thanks all. The monitor was the initial purchase but I soon realized that my 1060 my not be up for it. I think I will get a monitor first and see if I can live with the display settings compromises.

Something tells me a new graphics card will be in the works, perhaps after Christmas.

Snake-iis: I believe you are referring to the ASUS ROG Swift PG278QR 27” 1440p 1ms 165Hz DP HDMI G-SYNC Gaming Monitor with Eye Care. I'm in a 24 inch monitor now and sit about 3 ft from the screen. I have a huge desk and I'm wondering about a larger screen?

Thanks in advance

That's the one. Do it, I play on a 65" 4K and my eyes are about 3 feet away. When I do testing on the 27" the image is super crisp at 1440p with 2x MSAA at that viewing distance. You can adjust the zoom and position of your POV in the cockpit so you have your normal perspective on the instrument panel but you will have more screen space for blue sky/target scanning in your peripheral vision and while panning around.

You'd be well future proofed with that monitor as DCS running at 1440p with 4x MSAA and SSAA on will bring any processor to it's knees and would be comparable in quality to a much higher resolution image. It's going to be a while before a CPU/GPU can push 166Hz at those settings in the DCS engine.

Load up Doom/Counterstrike/Battlefield or some other high frame rate game and you'll see that monitor really shine. I also use it for image editing/CC as the colors are much more accurate than my TVs panel.

Your eyes definitely get used to the high frame rate. The difference between 166 and 60 fps is dramatic. The monitor will still be smooth at less than 166 but when the frame rate drops things start to look sluggish and the Track IR panning isn't as responsive.

That monitor is very well reviewed in tech media (why I bought it) and I concur 100%.

....I'd settle with MSAA-2x if you always want to be above 60fps and not drop below.

Recent updates seem to have changed how performance is affected with MSAA and SSAA, at least I had to dial back to have sustained 60 fps, locked 60 btw.

I agree,27", 1440p, 144Hz-166Hz, Gsync, heck, what more do you want ?

Lovin' it !

Ended up purchasing the Dell "Flagship" gaming monitor (144 Hz) and the RX 2070. 1044 wasn't terrible with the old 1060 but was averaging about 45 FPS and so I upgraded. Can't say I'm "always" above 60 fps but I'm averaging about 80FPS with a high of 150. Love the higher resolution and the heft of this monitor. Very solid.