Help me choose between 3070/80

[Tsagam]

Hi all

I'm having a hard time choosing what card to buy.

Basically, I play WoW most of the times but like to play the new iterations of Far Cry and Assassins Creed.

this is my current build:

CPU: i7-8700
GPU: msi 1070
Mobo: z370 m5 gaming
RAM: 16 GB G.Skill TridenZ 3000MHz
Monitor: MSI MAG271C 1080 144hz - not gonna be upgrading that in the near future as it's pretty new.
PSU: Antec Neo Eco 620W

I've preordered the 3080 Strix OC for around 1132$/966€ but reading other people writing about the 3080's, this seems to be overkill. So I've looked at the upcoming 3070 series instead, here I can get the 3070 Strix OC for the same price as a 3080 TUF OC 897$/766€, or I can buy the 3070 TUF for 693$/591€.

My own thoughts are that 3070 might be the one I "should" buy or should I keep my preorder for the 3080 Strix because it will keep my rig updated for a bit longer than if I were to buy a 3070?

[Advent]

Probably should go with the 3070 and use any left over $$$ to get a faster processor at some point, if needed. Since you play at 1080p, it was my understanding that at that resolution you're mostly CPU limited, especially in WoW.

[Tsagam]

Probably should go with the 3070 and use any left over $$$ to get a faster processor at some point, if needed. Since you play at 1080p, it was my understanding that at that resolution you're mostly CPU limited, especially in WoW.

I did think about upgrading to one of the newest Zen3 CPUs, but think I'll wait for the Zen4 in a years time. I don't know a lot about the CPU world and what to look for, but what I'm able to gather it seems the i7-8700 still is an okay-ish CPU?

[Yizu]

An 8700 non k should be very similar to a 3600. If it was me id keep it for another generation for a more substantial upgrade, probably by the time when DDR5 prices settle down. Id upgrade my monitor first if i were you, seeing 1440p upgrade wouldnt be that bad using a 6 core 12 thread processor, if it was new you can still probably sell it close to original price, the pixel density of a 1080p on a 27 inch screen is really not good, upgrading to a 1440p+3080 is probably the biggest upgrade you can do on your gaming setup.

[Kagthul]

Dont need a 3080 for 1440/high refresh though. A 3070 would be plenty. My 1080Ti can handle 1440p/high refresh (well over 100fps).. so a 3070 (equiv. to a 2080Ti - so at least 30% faster than my 1080Ti) should be just fine.

[Temp name]

Dont need a 3080 for 1440/high refresh though. A 3070 would be plenty. My 1080Ti can handle 1440p/high refresh (well over 100fps).. so a 3070 (equiv. to a 2080Ti - so at least 30% faster than my 1080Ti) should be just fine.

Depends on the games you play. On a 2080ti I can't get 1440p 144fps consistently on modern AAA games
1440p 120hz is the same amount of pixels as 4k 60hz, so they're about the same GPU requirement after all

[Viikkis]

Depends on the games you play. On a 2080ti I can't get 1440p 144fps consistently on modern AAA games
1440p 120hz is the same amount of pixels as 4k 60hz, so they're about the same GPU requirement after all

Depends also if you really need 144fps all the time for singleplayer games. For competetive FPS games solid 144 is great though usually competetive people are willing to lower their settings to hit that target. 144fps in WoW is not all that necessary at least in my opinion that is.

[Zelk]

3080 is way overkill for 1080p

[Kagthul]

Depends on the games you play. On a 2080ti I can't get 1440p 144fps consistently on modern AAA games

Sounds like you have an issue with your 2080Ti then. The only game i cant reliably get to ~110-130fps is Division 2, and thats not a GPU limitation, its a Draw-Call limitation similar to WoW. And ive got a 1080Ti, which is ~30% less powerful than your 2080Ti. And im undervolted (.825v) and clock-locked (via voltage curve) to 1700mhz. So your 2080Ti is probably more like 35-40% faster. Keep in mind that satisfactory high refresh does not mean "always 144fps". If you're clearing 100fps you're doing fine. Particularly with frame sync.

1440p 120hz is the same amount of pixels as 4k 60hz, so they're about the same GPU requirement after all

1440p 120hz is not the same amount of pixels as 4k 60.

1440p is 3,686,400 pixels.
2160p is 8,294,400 pixels.

If you multiply by 2 (to represent the 1440p at 120hz) you get 7,372,800

Still almost 1 million pixels shy of 4k.

And, strictly speaking, that isnt how GPU horsepower is utilized anyway. 1440p 120fps still takes quite a bit less GPU horsepower than 4k 60, even accounting for the disparity in pixel count

You dont need a 3080 for 1440p high refresh. It will likely last longer without needing an upgrade, but it is't necessary. Particularly if you're OK with turning down the settings that almost every AAA game has that add almost zero graphical fidelity but crush GPUs. And given how well DLSS 2.0 seems to be doing, its likely to actually get easier as more support for that comes in.

Besides, you might actually be able to buy a 3070. You're not going to be able to reasonably expect to get a 3080 until February at this point.

- - - Updated - - -

144fps in WoW is not all that necessary at least in my opinion that is.

Its also not something you can maintain in any busy area anyway. Out in the world? Sure. Crowded areas, you're still single-thread CPU limited.

And if you're seriously into competitive FPS games.. you're not going 1440p. You're going 1080p and 240hz or (now) 360hz.

[Tsagam]

Thanks for all your help so far!

Lets say i wanted to buy a new monitor, do i just go with a 27” 144hz or should i go for 32” 144hz.

Any recommendations?

Been looking at the Asus TUF VG289Q a 4K monitor priced around or a bit cheaper than a 1440p monitor and then go with the TUF 3080?

[Chickat]

Might want to make sure the monitor has decent HDR too.

[Kagthul]

Thanks for all your help so far!

Lets say i wanted to buy a new monitor, do i just go with a 27” 144hz or should i go for 32” 144hz.

Any recommendations?

Been looking at the Asus TUF VG289Q a 4K monitor priced around or a bit cheaper than a 1440p monitor and then go with the TUF 3080?

I think you're conflating refresh rates and resolutions.

144hz is not a resolution, its a refresh rate. A monitor of any resolution can be any given refresh rate.

that 4K monitor you're looking at is only 60hz. And its got a slow response time (5ms).

I'd take a high-refresh-rate 1440p panel any day of the week over 4K/60.

Particularly since, while the upgrade from 1080p to 1440p is quite noticeable (in the 24-27" range) because the pixels become much more dense and nearly impossible to see, going from 1440p-4k is not nearly as big of a noticeable upgrade, because the pixels were already so small you couldnt see them and now they are just smaller.

This ViewSonic gets very good ratings given how cheap it is:
https://pcpartpicker.com/product/DjH...vx2758-2kp-mhd

Though i personally dont have any experience with it.

Thats if you want to keep it to IPS. If you're OK with TN or VA panels, there are lots of options.

What you want to check reviews for is that there isn't any flickering, and that the G-sync compatability is good (if it is a Freesync panel), as not all of them work as well with G-sync as others.

I personally have a Dell S2719DGR, which is a 27" TN 1440p 144hz panel, and for a TN panel, the colors are quite good. Its an actual G-sync panel so there are guaranteed to not be any issues (unless its just a bad unit, ofc). You can usually find it for ~400$ if places still have it (it is now discontinued). There is a Freesync version ("DGF" at the end) that is otherwise identical. Also goes for 400$ and is still available (also completely G-sync compatible IIRC). If you want IPS they have a newer version (S2721DGF) that is IPS and Freesync but fully G-sync compatible. That one is 500.

I wouldn't spend much more than ~500$ on a 1440p high refresh display (regular 16:9 1440p; if you're talking Ultrawide - 3440x1440, then thats a different animal entirely).

Pretty much any decent panel will do, with most brands having a decent one in the 400-500$ range, and that Viewsonic i linked above apparently punching well above its weight for how much it costs. Keep an eye out for sales on AOC's AGON lineup (its their "gamery" sub-brand). They use the same LG panels as a lot of more expensive monitors and can usually be had cheaper.

- - - Updated - - -

Might want to make sure the monitor has decent HDR too.

Eh, if you dont have infinite money, this can be safely ignored while on a budget (even if that budget is a few hundred but not many hundreds). Windows HDR support is a joke, and while it looks nice, when you're trying to save money or just spend less, you can safely jettison HDR for at least the next 4-5 years.

If and when Microsoft gets its issues sorted out, and you have more money to spend, revisit.

Your old monitor can always make a nice second display.

[Balir]

The 3070 will be fine, HOWEVER you should look at upgrading your psu. It might be a little under done for the new cards.

[Temp name]

Sounds like you have an issue with your 2080Ti then. The only game i cant reliably get to ~110-130fps is Division 2, and thats not a GPU limitation, its a Draw-Call limitation similar to WoW. And ive got a 1080Ti, which is ~30% less powerful than your 2080Ti. And im undervolted (.825v) and clock-locked (via voltage curve) to 1700mhz. So your 2080Ti is probably more like 35-40% faster. Keep in mind that satisfactory high refresh does not mean "always 144fps". If you're clearing 100fps you're doing fine. Particularly with frame sync.

Depends on what settings you use too. I generally run with everything maxed, or as close to it as I can while maintaining 100+ fps.

Other games I can't generally do that at are Monster Hunter: World (generally ~90 maxed), and a couple other Ubisoft games.. Which honestly, is probably just Ubisofts fault, let's be honest.

1440p 120hz is not the same amount of pixels as 4k 60.

1440p is 3,686,400 pixels.
2160p is 8,294,400 pixels.

If you multiply by 2 (to represent the 1440p at 120hz) you get 7,372,800

Still almost 1 million pixels shy of 4k.

And, strictly speaking, that isnt how GPU horsepower is utilized anyway. 1440p 120fps still takes quite a bit less GPU horsepower than 4k 60, even accounting for the disparity in pixel count

You dont need a 3080 for 1440p high refresh. It will likely last longer without needing an upgrade, but it is't necessary. Particularly if you're OK with turning down the settings that almost every AAA game has that add almost zero graphical fidelity but crush GPUs. And given how well DLSS 2.0 seems to be doing, its likely to actually get easier as more support for that comes in.

Besides, you might actually be able to buy a 3070. You're not going to be able to reasonably expect to get a 3080 until February at this point.

Okay, you were right on the pixel count.

But I still like running on max, or close to max settings. And buying a component that lasts longer especially when you can afford it, makes sense imo.. If you can get it anyway. Even though I'm still not sure if you will actually be able to get a 3070, it'll probably sell out just as quick or quicker than the 3080 and 3090

- - - Updated - - -

The 3070 will be fine, HOWEVER you should look at upgrading your psu. It might be a little under done for the new cards.

620W should be fine for a 3070, as long as you don't OC it. But yeah, the specific model is mediocre so I'd probably look at replacing it.

[amarrite]

personally I'm going with a 3070 as I game on a 1440p 144hz monitor. Anything past that is just overkill for that resolution.

[Thunderball]

620W should be fine for a 3070, as long as you don't OC it. But yeah, the specific model is mediocre so I'd probably look at replacing it.

That PSU doesnt hold 620W.

[Temp name]

That PSU doesnt hold 620W.

That's basically what I said. If it did hold 620w it'd be fine, but I wouldn't trust it to.

[gaaara]

Wait for reviews to determine the gap between 3070/3080.
If nvidia slides are to believe they expect 3070 = 2080ti, with a bit less power requirement than 3080.

for 1080p/1440p i think 3070 is more than enough even with the lower VRAM.

[Kagthul]

Wait for reviews to determine the gap between 3070/3080.
If nvidia slides are to believe they expect 3070 = 2080ti, with a bit less power requirement than 3080.

“A bit”? Its like 100W less. Like, 2/3 of the power.

for 1080p/1440p i think 3070 is more than enough even with the lower VRAM.

VRAM amounts are massively overblown. As GN points out, just because Afterburner (or whatever) is showing 7GB used doesnt mean its actually being USED. If an application doesnt need to flush data from the VRAM, it wont. So it may look like a game is near to maxing out your VRAM when in reality it isnt even close.

Ive never seen my 1080Ti get near full VRAM usage at 1440p. 8GB on a 3070 is fine.