add arrow-down arrow-left arrow-right arrow-up authorcheckmark clipboard combo comment delete discord dots drag-handle dropdown-arrow errorfacebook history inbox instagram issuelink lock markup-bbcode markup-html markup-pcpp markup-cyclingbuilder markup-plain-text markup-reddit menu pin radio-button save search settings share star-empty star-full star-half switch successtag twitch twitter user warningwattage weight youtube

Best bang for the buck 2560x1080 (21x9) games machine.

Kobey

31 months ago

  • Budget: Good question...
  • Location: Toronto, Canada
  • Use: PC Gaming, Console, Movies, Desktop. 1-person viewing.
  • Peripherals required: Monitor 34" 21:9 (and all the rest)
  • Operating System required: Windows 10

Basically I am looking for a rig that can be best bang for the buck and yet drive a 2560x1080 21:9 34" display to the best of its abilities.

Here is the thing...I seem to be one of those freakish people who sees every little flaw and minor flicker when it comes to graphics. Be it ghosting, tearing, a single red pixel in a field of green, blurred edges, you name it the stuff catches my eye and annoys me. I loved my DLP all those years ago...could see the rainbow effect at times.

So I'm looking for a somewhat backwards build in that I'd like to get the ideal monitor and then make sure everything else can drive it appropriately.

As I mentioned I'd like it to be a 34" 21:9 curved 2000r display. Having said that I'm open to slightly larger or smaller, more or less curve and even flat given the right reasoning.

My thought process has been the 2560x1080 resolution because budget is obviously a factor and starting with a $800+ monitor and making sure it's a games machine driven to the best that ability will be pricey enough once it's all said and done. And I'm more than fine sacrificing some resolution to get rid of the graphical glitches.

I hope that's enough to go on and look forward to seeing your suggestions,

-Kobey

Comments

  • 31 months ago
  • 1 point

Spent the last day really reading up on things (like I should have done in the first place).

Guess it's been a while since I really paid attention (kids will do that to you)...I saw a 34" curved the other day and really really liked it. Did not help there were a bunch of 4k HDR TV's around and all of a sudden I'm thinking it's time for a new display and PC.

Figured the extra resolution of a 21:9 doing 2560 x 1080 would not have been that much more with the advances in GPUs the past few years.

Sad to see Nvidia which I have always had a preference for going the hardware licensing route and refusing to support the capabilities of display port even if it's not as good.

Not sure about freesync-2 but again seems like that will be the way of things given HRD and costs unless Nvidia takes the hit financially to push out more at lower prices.

But I see your point of it might not be that much longer of a wait though and for what I want another 12-months could make a big difference.

Thanks for all the quick and to the point replies!

  • 31 months ago
  • 0 points

What is your budget? Its hard to recommend anything without knowing that.

  • 31 months ago
  • 1 point

I'm flexible on the budget. Having said that it's not like I'm looking to go all out on CPUs / GPUs when I'm only going to do 2560 x 1080 so like I said it's kind of a backwards build in that respect.

Most of the monitors 21:9 that I have seen support either freesync or g-sync so that's a functionality that would be desired.

As a games machine 16g ram also kind of goes along with it.

SSD to boot from great...load times are not the end of the world so a second HDD for storage.

I tried using the builder but with so many options and not really knowing the optimal configurations for things figured I'd ask here based on what I did know I was looking for.

  • 31 months ago
  • 1 point

Your requirements of no tearing means free snyc or gsync and AMD has no high end cards that could get a locked 60FPS at max settings at 1080P ultra wide so you will need to go with a GTX 1070 at least which means no free snyc which means a huge jump in the monitor price by about $750. This is why the budget is important. I have a overclocked R9 390 which is on par on par with a overclocked Rx 480 and I can't fully max out recent games at 1080P ultra wide and get a solid 60FPS.

You will need to go for a GTX 1070 and a 1K monitor which is 1440P which means you will need even a better GPU since I assume you don't want non perfect downscaling....Its a slippery slope to go down. That is unless you wait for Vega to launch which would fix needing to spend 1K on a monitor. You can get a IPS 1080 ultra wide 29" freesync monitor for like $250 or a 34" one for about $400.

  • 31 months ago
  • 1 point

Ah...now I see what you mean...I had not paid enough attention to the differnces between freesync and gsync and just assumed they were sort of priced the same.

Which begs the question about why the price difference in both cards and monitors but this isn't the place for that.

So based on that it seems like it becomes more a matter of the graphical differences between AMD and NVidia and $1,000 increase on the later verse a FPS drop on the former.

Which means I've shot myself in the foot in what I asked for.

  • 31 months ago
  • 1 point

Ah...now I see what you mean...I had not paid enough attention to the differnces between freesync and gsync and just assumed they were sort of priced the same.

Nvidia drains your wallet with Gsync.

Which begs the question about why the price difference in both cards and monitors but this isn't the place for that.

Freesync is cheaper to make and AMD hasn't released there high end cards yet. The RX 480 isn't competing with the GTX 1070 which is what you would want for locked 60FPS 1080 ultra wide max settings. With that said you would need to go Gsync for a 1070 which only comes on 1440P ultra wides, not 1080P ultra wides. Then once you go 1440P ultra wide you will want more GPU power which means a GTX 1080.

So based on that it seems like it becomes more a matter of the graphical differences between AMD and NVidia and $1,000 increase on the later verse a FPS drop on the former.

Yup.

Which means I've shot myself in the foot in what I asked for.

Yup which is why I wanted to know your budget to see if its possible to fit what you want within budget or to tell you that you going to need to sacrifice in some place.

  • 31 months ago
  • 1 point

For a "bang for the buck" build then centered around a monitor, it might be your best bet to wait for Vega GPUs for a high-end option that'll take advantage of FreeSync.

  • 31 months ago
  • 1 point

I guess a Fury X could work though. Its not that far being a 1070 isnt it?

Its not the best bang for the buck unless used but its pretty powerful.

The only thing is when will vega be released though.

  • 31 months ago
  • 1 point

True, I forgot about that.

Sort

add arrow-down arrow-left arrow-right arrow-up authorcheckmark clipboard combo comment delete discord dots drag-handle dropdown-arrow errorfacebook history inbox instagram issuelink lock markup-bbcode markup-html markup-pcpp markup-cyclingbuilder markup-plain-text markup-reddit menu pin radio-button save search settings share star-empty star-full star-half switch successtag twitch twitter user warningwattage weight youtube