*why FRAME GEN usually sucks...* If you have, say 80FPS without FG and manage "100FPS" after FG is on then that's 25% more FPS. Right? Well, since exactly HALF the frames are now interpolated that "100FPS" is actually based on a render of 50FPS with every other frame extrapolated from the frame data. So? Well, your RESPONSIVENESS (lag, latency, slugishness) is based on the real, rendered frames so it will be slightly worse than what you'd get at a normal 50FPS (since there's a delay to render the next frame as you have to WAIT longer for the generated frame to extrapolated data from). The HIGHER the FPS number, the less of an issue this is. And of course there's a visual cost which varies quite a bit. Most of you guys probably know all this, but many don't. Do I think Frame Gen is the future? YES. Provided these three main things are true: 1) FPS gain is relatively high (i.e. 100->"150FPS"), and 2) FPS rendered is relatively high (i.e. "100FPS" (50FPS x2) for slower pace games, and higher for faster paced games), and 3) Visual artifacts, and frame time stutters are minimal *much of this is subjective, this is a bit of an oversimplification but so far with my RTX4070 +R7-5700X3D I haven't found a game where FG improved the experience. It also varies by the monitor type as things like Persistance Blur can be pretty bad sometimes at lower FPS values, so adding latency to improve VISUAL fluidity with reduce PB might be a worthwhile tradeoff. Again, subjective. Both the software and hardware will improve over time with dedicated HARDWARE reducing the drop in rendered frames. So, going from, say, 60FPS-> 116FPS or 100FPS->180FPS might be doable with minimal downside.
Anything up to the 4070 SUPER level of performance should be okay I think. Keep in mind that I haven't actually tried the 12600K so it's just an educated guess.
Can you test valorant in 1080p with 9800x3d with undervolt (thermalright axp 90 x-53 full copper cpu cooler) with 4070 zephyr edition. Did you think it can run 540hz monitor?
Indeed, it does. Here’s how I’d rank DLSS modes on a 32-inch 4K monitor: • DLSS Quality - Superb (comparable to or even better than native). • DLSS Balanced - Great. • DLSS Performance - Good (still enjoyable, especially with lower-tier GPUs like the RTX 4060 and 4060 Ti at 4K). • DLSS Ultra Performance - Okay (I’m not a fan of this quality mode, but it still looks better than 1080p native to my eyes).
Good to see the verification video in Japanese. 4070s seems to be still excellent. By the way, I'm using 7800xt. Dlss and FSR technology is gospel for gamers. And your video too!
I decided to get the 4080SUPER simply for the more vram. It sounds silly that I got it for 1080p but even that resolution is so demanding in modern AAA titles. At least my build will be very future proof sticking to 1080p.
I can barely play modern games now a days on my 4070 super with reasonable fps on 1440p lol. It's like I never upgraded with how unoptimized and demanding these games keep getting.
There are tons of older great looking games that 4070 Super can max out at 4K and provide 100+ fps. Plus, there are many decent modern AA and indie games. This GPU matches 3090, which was the most powerful GPU on the planet not so long ago.
As someone who plays more then 5 Hours .I do take my sweet time to enjoy 12G is not enough and sure 16 wont be in long run base on my own experince so best is to have 20G vram and over to be safe with or with out mode for long period of time
I was looking for a gpu for a triple 1080p monitor setup, I was eyeing this 4070s at first but I guess this isnt it. Even in 1080p alone, some games nowadays reach 10 to 11gb of vram usage, who knows what it'll be next year or two, and I plan on keeping my next gpu for around 6 years. Perhaps the 4070ti super or the 7900xt.
It’s definitely better than Diablo 4. I gave that game several hours, but I just couldn’t enjoy it. PoE 2 is still fun, even in Early Access, though it’s clear that many features are missing. I still can’t get over the fact that I can’t view key stats like crit chance and damage.
@@theivadim You can check your crit chance and damage tho, press G look at one of your spells for example Spark, at the end you can see it's DPS and next to it there is a little arrow, click on that arrow and you can check the spells crit chance and damage. :)
@@theivadim You can check your crit chance and damage tho, press G look at one of your spells for example Spark, at the end you can see it's DPS and next to it there is a little arrow, click on that arrow and you can check the spells crit chance and damage. :)
@@theivadim You can check your crit chance and damage tho, press G look at one of your spells for example Spark, at the end you can see it's DPS and next to it there is a little arrow, click on that arrow and you can check the spells crit chance and damage. :)
@@theivadim You can check your crit chance and damage tho, press G look at one of your spells for example Spark, at the end you can see it's DPS and next to it there is a little arrow, click on that arrow and you can check the spells crit chance and damage. :)
The jump from 1440p to 4k is not a small jump. Sure, it’s computationally expensive, but people who want viable 4k gaming are willing to spend the money on it. That doesn’t even fit the definition of a scam
@@theivadim It is a scam when games up getting upscaled to 4k from as low as 1080p and below. I only use DLSS on Quality mode with dynamic resolution disabled as it renders at a native 1440p. Any lower than that and I prefer to use native 1440p
@@rodriguezkev just ignorant .... i've both rtx 4070, and a 4090, and wanna say that even DLSS PERFORMANCE ON 4K RES, Looks way better than native 1440p, and it performs even better
The main reason I went with the 4070Ti Super is because of the 16GB of VRAM. I was actually planning on getting the 12GB 4070 Super but I started thinking about the future and how much more demanding games have gotten and decided to get something I can hold onto for a while. I got mine for $720 during Black Friday and I'm glad I stepped up to the 4070Ti Super because it is playing everything I want to play at max settings and 1440P.
After being with AMD for half a decade I am upgrading from 1080p to 1440p to this gpu. I'm getting it next week. The 7900 GRE is 710 USD vs 730 USD for the 4070 Super. I think if I am spending this much money on a gpu I don't want to deal with the lackluster visuals of FSR. FSR 3.1 looks okay and even good when implemented well but 99% of devs just dont care to implement it correctly with care. I'm planning to keep this GPU till the PS6 launches and only upgrading maybe 1-2 years after the launch of PS6 because I know at first games will still be optimized for PS5s since not everyone moves to the latest consoles as soon as they arrive. Can't wait to see 1440p for the first time and see if DLSS is really worth the extra money. I've got sooo many RT games I have to play. First I am going to play Witcher 3 for the first time. Heard its good
The 4070 SUPER isn’t particularly strong for ray tracing. Additionally, RT demands more video memory to run effectively, which the 4070 SUPER lacks. If you’re serious about enjoying RT, consider the 4070 Ti SUPER instead. That said, it might be worth waiting to see what new GPUs NVIDIA announces at CES on January 6th.
@@theivadim I have already been without a gpu for 2 weeks after selling all my spare pc parts early December. I am not waiting till February to buy the RTX 5070 also the RTX 4070 Ti Super is 280 USD more expensive. I don't have the money
@@west5385 I went for the rtx 4070 super for this reason. Almost 300$ for a few more GB or VRAM and a 15% power increase wasn't worth it in the end but it really depends on the resolution and framerate you like.
With dlss quality or balanced at 3840x2160 every game is playable with this card. Not native i know, but with dlss, it works well. And some games actually look better with dlss.
4070 is and has never been a 4k card as little as the 4080 is the only 4k card is the 4090. Of course you can play 4k on everything even a 1080ti. It just depends how far down you want to crank down the settings. But proper maxed out settings in newly released games. Only the 4090 can manage it. Ppl need to stop pretending like the 4070 is anything else. I go even that far to say 4070 and 4070 super and ti are 1080p cards because of 12 gb vram. 4070 ti super 4080 and 4080 super are 1440p cards and 4090 is 4k card. The 4060 is entry level 1080p card without being able to max out anything while the 4070 is meant to max out in 1080p. Some games already use 14+ gb vram on my in 1440p and I have a 4070 ti super. So I know what I'm talking about. I can barely run Hogwarts legacy or Alan Wake 2 or Avatar with DLSS Q and Frame gen on maxed out in 1440p so it is hard on the edge of runnable. And Avatar uses 14-15 gb of vram. Diablo 4 does aswell. CP2077 runs quite fine maxed out but only with at least DLSS Q enabled. No way you can play 4k on a 4070 ti super in those games at max settings let alone on a normal 4070 super.
huge 71° and fan speed of 2000 rpm ? loud and hot to be honest if you are woundered how this card can do 4k and lower Graphics ... i am not woundered and RT not maxed out ? damn it Nvidia is really overhyped.
I got a gaming desktop with that comes with 4070 super. Should I get a simple 1440P 165 hz gaming monitor or pay at least twice for a 4K 120hz gaming monitor? I mean can a 4070 super run the latest games in 4k above 80 fps?
God there are no good options in the gpu market. If you want ray tracing and dlss, you need to go with Nvidia. I originally thought that as long as the gpu had the horse power, that it didn't matter that Nvidia decided to subtract the bus width by 64 bits, but now I realize, you need to settle for an uncomfortable amount of vram that is sure to be inadequate within 5 years I'd say. I'm thinking about starting a business mainly dedicated towards upgrading vram capacity. Otherwise, you're stuck with AMD. I'm not ashamed to admit that I am greedy and am not willing to give up RTX HDR, DLSS, and rt performance. The only way forward I can see is a straight vram upgrade.
We don’t even need to look five years ahead. As shown in this video, the lack of adequate VRAM capacity is already limiting us from using certain features-like frame generation and full ray tracing. I’d say the 4070 SUPER would’ve been perfect with 16GB, but then NVIDIA wouldn’t be able to upsell us to the 4070 Ti SUPER. It’s a smart business move.
@@theivadim the 4070 ti should have been 16GB too then. I'm more upset with AMD. They're such scrubs. They are outmatched by Nvidia on every front. I really do want to support them too, but there's too much that they lack.
So when people tested on said resolution (1080p, 1440p, 4k), it actually meant screen resolution in game settings not physical monitor size. Coz I see ur monitor is not like 4k size. Correct me if Im wrong about this bcoz this in-game screen resolution setting vs monitor size confuses me.
@@theivadim EDIT: nvm Im an idiot, quick google search tells me it does not, mbmb 😅 I mean whether monitor size impacts performance? Like does it matter if I play 1080p settings on 1080p monitor vs 4k settings on 1080p monitor vs 1080p settings on 4k monitor etc?
For the best visual experience, always set your monitor to its native resolution. If your GPU struggles to handle it, use resolution upscaling technologies like DLSS, FSR, or XeSS to boost performance. As demonstrated in this video, it’s possible to find settings that let you enjoy games at 4K, even with a GPU that isn’t technically marketed as a 4K gaming card.
Monitor size itself does not impact performance; what matters is the resolution you are rendering the game at. Here’s how it breaks down: 1. 1080p settings on a 1080p monitor: The game is rendered and displayed at 1080p. This is optimal because the monitor’s native resolution matches the game resolution, ensuring sharp visuals with no scaling overhead. 2. 4K settings on a 1080p monitor: In this case, the GPU renders the game at 4K, but the monitor scales it down to display at 1080p. This is called downscaling. It produces sharper visuals than native 1080p because the higher render resolution adds more detail, but it still requires a lot more GPU power, similar to playing at native 4K. 3. 1080p settings on a 4K monitor: Here, the game is rendered at 1080p but displayed on a 4K monitor. The monitor or GPU upscales the 1080p resolution to fill the 4K screen, which can lead to a blurry or less crisp image compared to native 4K. However, the performance remains the same as playing at 1080p on a 1080p monitor since the GPU still renders at 1080p. Summary: • Performance depends on the resolution the game is rendered at, not the monitor size. • Downscaling (4K rendered → displayed at 1080p) looks better but is GPU-intensive. • Upscaling (1080p rendered → displayed at 4K) preserves performance but reduces visual quality. If your GPU can handle it, playing at a higher resolution like 4K and downscaling can provide better visuals even on a 1080p monitor. Otherwise, matching the game resolution to your monitor’s native resolution is the most efficient and visually clean option.
1080p is 1080p, even on a 100 inch monitor, it won't be harder to run because it's the same number of pixels and it will be the same computing power. But when we talk about what you see with your eyes, a 24" inch 1080 p monitor vs a 27"inchp 1080p monitor, the 24" monitor would be the one recommended because it has better pixel density compared to the 27" one.@@NookDeSus
games look like s*** and run like s***, this is next gen, boys, two terrible games that i would avoid even with rtx 4090 = stalker 2 and indiana jones... generic games with a performance that doesnt justify the visuals... frame gen, so far i dont like at all, it adds some blur to the image and suddenly games do not look like games anymore (3d and vectors etc) but more like a video, streaming or something.... and im not even mentioning the extra latency. current gen sucks
Купил готовый комп. 14400f RTX 4070 Super. 32гб Ddr4 Win 11. Периодически SSD нагружается на 100% Система тупит. Игры нормально работают , но загрузка и установка игр превращается в Ад. Помогите консольщику , куда копать?
Никогда не сталкивался с такой проблемой. Но я бы первым делом просканировал на наличие вирусов. Убедился бы что диск не забит файлами на максимум. И потом ещё переустановил бы Windows. Ну и самое последнее что можно сделать- заменить ssd.
Nope. Too weak. Not enough VRAM. Will suck in Cyberpunk, Indiana Jones, Hogwarts Legacy, The Last of Us Part 1, etc ....... unless Low settings and Low texture packs.
Indiana it runs 1080p full settings and full ray tracing. 4k I drop textures down a bit, most setting still highest, few medium. Barely notice difference in quality, certainly not worth £200 more for likes of 4070ti with only 11% performance increase. Ppl get too hung up on vram. Only a couple of games I’ve played actually get close to hitting the 12GB.
Always glad to see this gpu on channel. Yes, 4K will be too much to chew in the future, but for 1440p, it is a very grateful graphics card.
My pleasure!
Same combo with 1440p and 1080p :) Great job
Nice! I'll be testing this card at 1440p resolution next.
Keep up the good work! I love your videos as always! 😁
Thank you! Will do! I appreciate your continuous support.🤝🙂
Great video, thanks!
what application do you use to check your stats like that ?
Rtx 4070 Super should be able of outputting 8K effortlessly, Nvidia is making the big money here.
Silent Hill 2 4k DLSS Qualty.Grafics max out.
40+ fps .Perfect for me.
4K55" TV 120hz.
"40 fps"
"Perfect"
Don't comment again
@calebpipet I sad " for me" stupid
i've been wanting to upgrade my gpu for a while and i think i'm gonna go with the 4070 super, will it go well with my ryzen 9 5900x? Thanks.
Other than the vram issue it’s still a pretty good card for 1440p and I’m going to ride it as long as possible before upgrading
another excellent video Vadim
Glad you enjoyed it
@@theivadimIs it the oc model. Should i wait for the 5070 or not (based on your experience)
@@Palestiano At this point, I'd wait to see what NVIDIA reveals at CES on 6 January.
*why FRAME GEN usually sucks...*
If you have, say 80FPS without FG and manage "100FPS" after FG is on then that's 25% more FPS. Right? Well, since exactly HALF the frames are now interpolated that "100FPS" is actually based on a render of 50FPS with every other frame extrapolated from the frame data. So?
Well, your RESPONSIVENESS (lag, latency, slugishness) is based on the real, rendered frames so it will be slightly worse than what you'd get at a normal 50FPS (since there's a delay to render the next frame as you have to WAIT longer for the generated frame to extrapolated data from).
The HIGHER the FPS number, the less of an issue this is.
And of course there's a visual cost which varies quite a bit.
Most of you guys probably know all this, but many don't. Do I think Frame Gen is the future? YES. Provided these three main things are true:
1) FPS gain is relatively high (i.e. 100->"150FPS"), and
2) FPS rendered is relatively high (i.e. "100FPS" (50FPS x2) for slower pace games, and higher for faster paced games), and
3) Visual artifacts, and frame time stutters are minimal
*much of this is subjective, this is a bit of an oversimplification but so far with my RTX4070 +R7-5700X3D I haven't found a game where FG improved the experience. It also varies by the monitor type as things like Persistance Blur can be pretty bad sometimes at lower FPS values, so adding latency to improve VISUAL fluidity with reduce PB might be a worthwhile tradeoff. Again, subjective.
Both the software and hardware will improve over time with dedicated HARDWARE reducing the drop in rendered frames. So, going from, say, 60FPS-> 116FPS or 100FPS->180FPS might be doable with minimal downside.
imagine people getting this gpu now and already have a VRAM bottleneck, good job nvidia you have the best customers a company can dream of
brother my specs i512600k ram ddr5 32 gb gpu rtx 3070 what is best gpu for me
Anything up to the 4070 SUPER level of performance should be okay I think. Keep in mind that I haven't actually tried the 12600K so it's just an educated guess.
you are fine with the setup, for a higher gpu you need a better cpu
@@r0xa18 but i can pair rtx 4070 super and it wont bottelneck much
@@theivadim thanks in future i will pair rtx 4070 or 4070 super
@Suzzpect9 Sure you can but in cpu heavy games your cpu will be a bottleneck. 3070 is fine for your cpu
Even my 4090 is sometimes too weak for 4k
getting microscopic 4k monitor just to play games rendered in 1080p upscaled to 4k is beyond stiupid
Can you test valorant in 1080p with 9800x3d with undervolt (thermalright axp 90 x-53 full copper cpu cooler) with 4070 zephyr edition. Did you think it can run 540hz monitor?
Hi, how is dlss working on your monitor, does it have a nice picture???
Indeed, it does. Here’s how I’d rank DLSS modes on a 32-inch 4K monitor:
• DLSS Quality - Superb (comparable to or even better than native).
• DLSS Balanced - Great.
• DLSS Performance - Good (still enjoyable, especially with lower-tier GPUs like the RTX 4060 and 4060 Ti at 4K).
• DLSS Ultra Performance - Okay (I’m not a fan of this quality mode, but it still looks better than 1080p native to my eyes).
Good to see the verification video in Japanese.
4070s seems to be still excellent.
By the way, I'm using 7800xt.
Dlss and FSR technology is gospel for gamers.
And your video too!
I think it’s UA-cam’s new auto-dub feature translating my videos into Japanese. The original uploads are in English. That's pretty cool!🙂
I decided to get the 4080SUPER simply for the more vram. It sounds silly that I got it for 1080p but even that resolution is so demanding in modern AAA titles. At least my build will be very future proof sticking to 1080p.
1080p with a 4080 super is crazy
@ I’m a man of frames, what can I say?
is it good enough for 3440*1440?
i found a used one for 500$
Yes
I can barely play modern games now a days on my 4070 super with reasonable fps on 1440p lol. It's like I never upgraded with how unoptimized and demanding these games keep getting.
There are tons of older great looking games that 4070 Super can max out at 4K and provide 100+ fps. Plus, there are many decent modern AA and indie games. This GPU matches 3090, which was the most powerful GPU on the planet not so long ago.
gonna get it soon, 660€ for 1440p and medium/high 4k with tech instead of a 4080 for 440€ more is great.
As someone who plays more then 5 Hours .I do take my sweet time to enjoy 12G is not enough and sure 16 wont be in long run base on my own experince so best is to have 20G vram and over to be safe with or with out mode for long period of time
I was looking for a gpu for a triple 1080p monitor setup, I was eyeing this 4070s at first but I guess this isnt it. Even in 1080p alone, some games nowadays reach 10 to 11gb of vram usage, who knows what it'll be next year or two, and I plan on keeping my next gpu for around 6 years. Perhaps the 4070ti super or the 7900xt.
Glad to see that you are enjoying PoE 2! Such an amazing game! Hats off to the devs.
It’s definitely better than Diablo 4. I gave that game several hours, but I just couldn’t enjoy it. PoE 2 is still fun, even in Early Access, though it’s clear that many features are missing. I still can’t get over the fact that I can’t view key stats like crit chance and damage.
@@theivadim You can check your crit chance and damage tho, press G look at one of your spells for example Spark, at the end you can see it's DPS and next to it there is a little arrow, click on that arrow and you can check the spells crit chance and damage. :)
@@theivadim You can check your crit chance and damage tho, press G look at one of your spells for example Spark, at the end you can see it's DPS and next to it there is a little arrow, click on that arrow and you can check the spells crit chance and damage. :)
@@theivadim You can check your crit chance and damage tho, press G look at one of your spells for example Spark, at the end you can see it's DPS and next to it there is a little arrow, click on that arrow and you can check the spells crit chance and damage. :)
@@theivadim You can check your crit chance and damage tho, press G look at one of your spells for example Spark, at the end you can see it's DPS and next to it there is a little arrow, click on that arrow and you can check the spells crit chance and damage. :)
4k gaming is a scam. Just play 1440p. The visuals from 1080 to 1440 is very noticeable as where 1440 to 4k is hard to even tell.
4K gaming is no scam. It's much better than 1440p thanks to DLSS.
The jump from 1440p to 4k is not a small jump. Sure, it’s computationally expensive, but people who want viable 4k gaming are willing to spend the money on it. That doesn’t even fit the definition of a scam
@@theivadim It is a scam when games up getting upscaled to 4k from as low as 1080p and below.
I only use DLSS on Quality mode with dynamic resolution disabled as it renders at a native 1440p. Any lower than that and I prefer to use native 1440p
it is a scam...but i do like it. so we get better cards because the morons want cards that can handle 4k -RT..so the 2k-no RT cards get cheaper.
@@rodriguezkev just ignorant ....
i've both rtx 4070, and a 4090,
and wanna say that even DLSS PERFORMANCE ON 4K RES, Looks way better than native 1440p, and it performs even better
The main reason I went with the 4070Ti Super is because of the 16GB of VRAM. I was actually planning on getting the 12GB 4070 Super but I started thinking about the future and how much more demanding games have gotten and decided to get something I can hold onto for a while. I got mine for $720 during Black Friday and I'm glad I stepped up to the 4070Ti Super because it is playing everything I want to play at max settings and 1440P.
Is that keyboard like really quiet?
Not really. It’s not loud, but I haven’t come across a truly silent mechanical keyboard-they all make some noise.
DLSS preset based on NVIDIA recommendation
1080p - Quality
1440p - Balanced
4K - Performance
At this point everything should be at least balanced
30FPS 4K Max Dlss or not is perfect for me, so is very very good. Thanks for test
Yup on dlss performance with gysnc expect 40-60fps
After being with AMD for half a decade I am upgrading from 1080p to 1440p to this gpu. I'm getting it next week. The 7900 GRE is 710 USD vs 730 USD for the 4070 Super. I think if I am spending this much money on a gpu I don't want to deal with the lackluster visuals of FSR. FSR 3.1 looks okay and even good when implemented well but 99% of devs just dont care to implement it correctly with care. I'm planning to keep this GPU till the PS6 launches and only upgrading maybe 1-2 years after the launch of PS6 because I know at first games will still be optimized for PS5s since not everyone moves to the latest consoles as soon as they arrive. Can't wait to see 1440p for the first time and see if DLSS is really worth the extra money. I've got sooo many RT games I have to play. First I am going to play Witcher 3 for the first time. Heard its good
The 4070 SUPER isn’t particularly strong for ray tracing. Additionally, RT demands more video memory to run effectively, which the 4070 SUPER lacks. If you’re serious about enjoying RT, consider the 4070 Ti SUPER instead. That said, it might be worth waiting to see what new GPUs NVIDIA announces at CES on January 6th.
@@theivadim RT is fine in any recent RTX Gpu's but Path Tracing is a whole different level
@@theivadim I have already been without a gpu for 2 weeks after selling all my spare pc parts early December. I am not waiting till February to buy the RTX 5070 also the RTX 4070 Ti Super is 280 USD more expensive. I don't have the money
@@west5385 I went for the rtx 4070 super for this reason. Almost 300$ for a few more GB or VRAM and a 15% power increase wasn't worth it in the end but it really depends on the resolution and framerate you like.
In Canada I paid 560$ usd or 800 CAD for 4070 Super, why its so expensive at your place?
With dlss on quality runs everything and looks great
With dlss quality or balanced at 3840x2160 every game is playable with this card. Not native i know, but with dlss, it works well. And some games actually look better with dlss.
Yeap and it almost looks exactly as native 4k :)
At 4k the cpu does not matter as much as the bottleneck is your gpu. 4070 super not for native 4k. Maybe with dlss
4070 is and has never been a 4k card as little as the 4080 is the only 4k card is the 4090. Of course you can play 4k on everything even a 1080ti. It just depends how far down you want to crank down the settings. But proper maxed out settings in newly released games. Only the 4090 can manage it. Ppl need to stop pretending like the 4070 is anything else. I go even that far to say 4070 and 4070 super and ti are 1080p cards because of 12 gb vram. 4070 ti super 4080 and 4080 super are 1440p cards and 4090 is 4k card. The 4060 is entry level 1080p card without being able to max out anything while the 4070 is meant to max out in 1080p. Some games already use 14+ gb vram on my in 1440p and I have a 4070 ti super. So I know what I'm talking about. I can barely run Hogwarts legacy or Alan Wake 2 or Avatar with DLSS Q and Frame gen on maxed out in 1440p so it is hard on the edge of runnable. And Avatar uses 14-15 gb of vram. Diablo 4 does aswell. CP2077 runs quite fine maxed out but only with at least DLSS Q enabled. No way you can play 4k on a 4070 ti super in those games at max settings let alone on a normal 4070 super.
For 1440p? Yes. 4K? No.
i agree, it's a 1440p card
it's a great GPU for 1080p, if it was 300$ cheaper.
huge 71° and fan speed of 2000 rpm ? loud and hot to be honest if you are woundered how this card can do 4k and lower Graphics ... i am not woundered and RT not maxed out ? damn it Nvidia is really overhyped.
The only nvidia 4k card right now is the 4090. The 4070s still is a sold card for 1440p.
I got a gaming desktop with that comes with 4070 super. Should I get a simple 1440P 165 hz gaming monitor or pay at least twice for a 4K 120hz gaming monitor? I mean can a 4070 super run the latest games in 4k above 80 fps?
Yes it can
All I want it to do is 1440 and it does it oh so well.
God there are no good options in the gpu market. If you want ray tracing and dlss, you need to go with Nvidia. I originally thought that as long as the gpu had the horse power, that it didn't matter that Nvidia decided to subtract the bus width by 64 bits, but now I realize, you need to settle for an uncomfortable amount of vram that is sure to be inadequate within 5 years I'd say. I'm thinking about starting a business mainly dedicated towards upgrading vram capacity. Otherwise, you're stuck with AMD. I'm not ashamed to admit that I am greedy and am not willing to give up RTX HDR, DLSS, and rt performance. The only way forward I can see is a straight vram upgrade.
We don’t even need to look five years ahead. As shown in this video, the lack of adequate VRAM capacity is already limiting us from using certain features-like frame generation and full ray tracing. I’d say the 4070 SUPER would’ve been perfect with 16GB, but then NVIDIA wouldn’t be able to upsell us to the 4070 Ti SUPER. It’s a smart business move.
@@theivadim the 4070 ti should have been 16GB too then. I'm more upset with AMD. They're such scrubs. They are outmatched by Nvidia on every front. I really do want to support them too, but there's too much that they lack.
So when people tested on said resolution (1080p, 1440p, 4k), it actually meant screen resolution in game settings not physical monitor size. Coz I see ur monitor is not like 4k size. Correct me if Im wrong about this bcoz this in-game screen resolution setting vs monitor size confuses me.
I have no idea what you’re talking about. Resolution and size are two different things; they measure completely separate aspects.
@@theivadim EDIT: nvm Im an idiot, quick google search tells me it does not, mbmb 😅
I mean whether monitor size impacts performance? Like does it matter if I play 1080p settings on 1080p monitor vs 4k settings on 1080p monitor vs 1080p settings on 4k monitor etc?
For the best visual experience, always set your monitor to its native resolution. If your GPU struggles to handle it, use resolution upscaling technologies like DLSS, FSR, or XeSS to boost performance. As demonstrated in this video, it’s possible to find settings that let you enjoy games at 4K, even with a GPU that isn’t technically marketed as a 4K gaming card.
Monitor size itself does not impact performance; what matters is the resolution you are rendering the game at. Here’s how it breaks down:
1. 1080p settings on a 1080p monitor: The game is rendered and displayed at 1080p. This is optimal because the monitor’s native resolution matches the game resolution, ensuring sharp visuals with no scaling overhead.
2. 4K settings on a 1080p monitor: In this case, the GPU renders the game at 4K, but the monitor scales it down to display at 1080p. This is called downscaling. It produces sharper visuals than native 1080p because the higher render resolution adds more detail, but it still requires a lot more GPU power, similar to playing at native 4K.
3. 1080p settings on a 4K monitor: Here, the game is rendered at 1080p but displayed on a 4K monitor. The monitor or GPU upscales the 1080p resolution to fill the 4K screen, which can lead to a blurry or less crisp image compared to native 4K. However, the performance remains the same as playing at 1080p on a 1080p monitor since the GPU still renders at 1080p.
Summary:
• Performance depends on the resolution the game is rendered at, not the monitor size.
• Downscaling (4K rendered → displayed at 1080p) looks better but is GPU-intensive.
• Upscaling (1080p rendered → displayed at 4K) preserves performance but reduces visual quality.
If your GPU can handle it, playing at a higher resolution like 4K and downscaling can provide better visuals even on a 1080p monitor. Otherwise, matching the game resolution to your monitor’s native resolution is the most efficient and visually clean option.
1080p is 1080p, even on a 100 inch monitor, it won't be harder to run because it's the same number of pixels and it will be the same computing power. But when we talk about what you see with your eyes, a 24" inch 1080 p monitor vs a 27"inchp 1080p monitor, the 24" monitor would be the one recommended because it has better pixel density compared to the 27" one.@@NookDeSus
Rememeber when 2080ti was 4k gpu hahah games are WORSE nowadays
You can max any game at 1080p thats all i want. Fuck 1440 i want everything high frames and maxed tf out. Solves my "12gb is not enough vram" problem
games look like s*** and run like s***, this is next gen, boys, two terrible games that i would avoid even with rtx 4090 = stalker 2 and indiana jones... generic games with a performance that doesnt justify the visuals... frame gen, so far i dont like at all, it adds some blur to the image and suddenly games do not look like games anymore (3d and vectors etc) but more like a video, streaming or something.... and im not even mentioning the extra latency. current gen sucks
please i dont have any money to pay for what i am being jealous about
Купил готовый комп.
14400f RTX 4070 Super.
32гб Ddr4 Win 11.
Периодически SSD нагружается на 100%
Система тупит.
Игры нормально работают , но загрузка и установка игр превращается в Ад.
Помогите консольщику , куда копать?
Никогда не сталкивался с такой проблемой. Но я бы первым делом просканировал на наличие вирусов. Убедился бы что диск не забит файлами на максимум. И потом ещё переустановил бы Windows. Ну и самое последнее что можно сделать- заменить ssd.
Nope. Too weak. Not enough VRAM. Will suck in Cyberpunk, Indiana Jones, Hogwarts Legacy, The Last of Us Part 1, etc ....... unless Low settings and Low texture packs.
I play Indiana in 4k easy... Just put the texture pool to high or medium...
Indiana it runs 1080p full settings and full ray tracing. 4k I drop textures down a bit, most setting still highest, few medium. Barely notice difference in quality, certainly not worth £200 more for likes of 4070ti with only 11% performance increase. Ppl get too hung up on vram. Only a couple of games I’ve played actually get close to hitting the 12GB.
I play cyberpunk 4k dlss quality gets 70fps with high settings, you clearly know nothing
your right^^ not paying 700 bucks to lower my settings. Thats why i bought an 4080 for the 16gb and im happy with that
@@adegreen2731 How many hours are you playing ? 1 or 2 or 4+ where the real problem starts