# GTX 1080 TI on X58. What is your experience with that?



## Tomgang (Jun 16, 2017)

After upgrading my old X58 setup with another cpu, SSD´s and so on. I made a dession to take the last step and replace GPU´s as a last thing to do before moving on to a new platform.

But also to try single GPU for the first time since GTX 285 where the shit to get and i am tired of running out of Vram. And here GTX 1080 TI looks to be the sweet spot to replace GTX 970 SLI. GTX 1080 non TI does not give more the ekstra performce i want over GTX 970 SLI.

But is there any thing i shut be aware of with moving to Pascal. Here i think about things like does it even run on PCIe 2 and how about bottleneck?

Does any one have any experience with GTX 1080 TI/pascal on this old platform.


----------



## FreedomEclipse (Jun 16, 2017)

Sidegrade to a 1070. I had 970s in sli and did te same thing


----------



## Tomgang (Jun 16, 2017)

FreedomEclipse said:


> Sidegrade to a 1070. I had 970s in sli and did te same thing



But your system is X79 based and i wanted to know about X58. None the less good to know it runs on this platform cause then i might also run on X58.


----------



## Toothless (Jun 16, 2017)

You'll be fine. 2.0 x16 is like 3.0 x8 which NVIDIA cards are perfectly fine on.


----------



## CAPSLOCKSTUCK (Jun 16, 2017)

Isnt there a potential BIOS/UEFI conflict?


----------



## FilipM (Jun 16, 2017)

I'm running a 1080Ti on an X58. No problems here, if you can go for it. I also ran a 1060 with no bottlenecks at all. With this, you might see some bottleneck at lets say 1080P medium in Superposition, but it's been fine everywhere else.


----------



## R-T-B (Jun 16, 2017)

CAPSLOCKSTUCK said:


> Isnt there a potential BIOS/UEFI conflict?



No.  I'm nearly certain nvidia cards still have legacy bios modules.


----------



## Tomgang (Jun 16, 2017)

Toothless said:


> You'll be fine. 2.0 x16 is like 3.0 x8 which NVIDIA cards are perfectly fine on.



Great. Just what i wanted to read.



FilipM said:


> I'm running a 1080Ti on an X58. No problems here, if you can go for it. I also ran a 1060 with no bottlenecks at all. With this, you might see some bottleneck at lets say 1080P medium in Superposition, but it's been fine everywhere else.



I can and will if it work. You are the living prof then that it works on X58. Just what i needed.

Then there is nothing else to do than wait for Zotac GTX 1080 TI MINI hits the stores. Its the only GTX 1080 TI that fits in my case, they others are to long.


----------



## R00kie (Jun 16, 2017)

I've tried a GTX 1080 with my X5650 clocked at 4 GHz for a day. It was a really pleasant experience, framerates were high and stable, and the only game that had a lower framerate comparing to my 5820K platform was GTA 5, everything else ran flawlessly.


----------



## Tomgang (Jun 16, 2017)

gdallsk said:


> I've tried a GTX 1080 with my X5650 clocked at 4 GHz for a day. It was a really pleasant experience, framerates were high and stable, and the only game that had a lower framerate comparing to my 5820K platform was GTA 5, everything else ran flawlessly.



Awesome. No wunder with GTA V, that game just sucks cpu power like an alcoholic drinking he´s liquid.


----------



## Ferrum Master (Jun 16, 2017)

Tomgang said:


> Awesome. No wunder with GTA V, that game just sucks cpu power like an alcoholic drinking he´s liquid.



You have something against alcoholics?


----------



## Tomgang (Jun 16, 2017)

Ferrum Master said:


> You have something against alcoholics?


Yes i have when the alcoholic tells me that M.2 SSD cut not boot om X58 

else


----------



## Ferrum Master (Jun 16, 2017)

Tomgang said:


> Yes i have when the alcoholic tells me that M.2 SSD cut not boot om X58
> 
> else



That's an undocumented exception. Won't happen again lol


----------



## Tomgang (Jun 16, 2017)

Ferrum Master said:


> That's an undocumented exception. Won't happen again lol



*Undocumented *exception  . Oh i think its well documented 

Right here 

https://www.techpowerup.com/forums/...stem-with-m-2-pci-adaptor-can-it-work.231611/


----------



## Durvelle27 (Jun 16, 2017)

Never tried a 1080Ti but i had a RX 480 with X5650 and it performed great


----------



## brandonwh64 (Jun 16, 2017)

X58 should be fine on a 1070/1080. My I7-920 was great for a long time and if I had to, I would still rock one today.


----------



## Rehmanpa (Jun 17, 2017)

I have ran a gtx 1080 on an unoverclocked x5670 and it was fine, almost no difference, except with warhammer dawn of war 2. My r9 290x got twice the fps on that game with my 4790k vs my 5670 and gtx 1080 for some reason. Still that was ultra 1440p at at least 80fps iirc but still kind like what the heck. Point is I'd save your money for something more useful, like food or a car or something.


----------



## Tomgang (Jun 17, 2017)

Durvelle27 said:


> Never tried a 1080Ti but i had a RX 480 with X5650 and it performed great



1080 TI is a great deal faster that RX480 and by that needs more CPU power to feed it but if that cut run so can pascal. But year either my old I7 920 or my current I7 980X have no trouble feeding my current GTX 970 sli.



brandonwh64 said:


> X58 should be fine on a 1070/1080. My I7-920 was great for a long time and if I had to, I would still rock one today.



Well its not GTX 1070/1080 but GTX 1080 TI. I think that will also be fine.




Rehmanpa said:


> I have ran a gtx 1080 on an unoverclocked x5670 and it was fine, almost no difference, except with warhammer dawn of war 2. My r9 290x got twice the fps on that game with my 4790k vs my 5670 and gtx 1080 for some reason. Still that was ultra 1440p at at least 80fps iirc but still kind like what the heck. Point is I'd save your money for something more useful, like food or a car or something.



Thats is impresive if a stock xeon can feed a GTX 1080. Then overclokked I7 980X shut feed a GTX 1080 TI just fine aswell. Save my money. no thanks, im tired of running out of Vram. Im done with mid end GPU´s. Its whas the same problem with GTX 660 TI sli i had before. I hope with GTX 1080 TI that have 11 GB vram will last longer before i need to replace it.


----------



## Rehmanpa (Jun 19, 2017)

Tomgang said:


> 1080 TI is a great deal faster that RX480 and by that needs more CPU power to feed it but if that cut run so can pascal. But year either my old I7 920 or my current I7 980X have no trouble feeding my current GTX 970 sli.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Honestly cpu bottleneck is over hyped.  My xeons beung just fine with a few rare exceptions us one of the reasons why in my mind the 7700k has no merit versus the ryzen 1700. Honestly if you're willing to I'd wait for volta at the end of summer. If not get a 1080 ti now. Vega will probably either a. Not be as good or b. Be insanely expensive due to crypto currency mining.


----------



## Upgrayedd (Jun 19, 2017)

Rehmanpa said:


> wait for volta at the end of summer.



Volta is the end of summer?


----------



## Capitan Harlock (Jun 19, 2017)

I'm a little surprised by what some of you guys are saying to him because if i recall 6 months ago i was asking if by just going by a w3520 (i7 920) to a X5660 i could have enough power for running a Fury X.
Now i come here and i see people saying that with is X58 chipset he can run just fine with a 1080TI .
How is that possible that i could not run a Fury X with my previos system and he can? 
I really wanna know.


----------



## Rehmanpa (Jun 19, 2017)

Capitan Harlock said:


> I'm a little surprised by what some of you guys are saying to him because if i recall 6 months ago i was asking if by just going by a w3520 (i7 920) to a X5660 i could have enough power for running a Fury X.
> Now i come here and i see people saying that with is X58 chipset he can run just fine with a 1080TI .
> How is that possible that i could not run a Fury X with my previos system and he can?
> I really wanna know.


X58 is an amazing chipset. It's literally just awesome. It runs my gtx1080 just fine, in addition with having 24 threads and 72gb ram


----------



## Duality92 (Jun 19, 2017)

I might be getting a 1080 Ti from Zotac soon with my W3680, I'll let you know xD


----------



## FilipM (Jun 20, 2017)

Capitan Harlock said:


> I'm a little surprised by what some of you guys are saying to him because if i recall 6 months ago i was asking if by just going by a w3520 (i7 920) to a X5660 i could have enough power for running a Fury X.
> Now i come here and i see people saying that with is X58 chipset he can run just fine with a 1080TI .
> How is that possible that i could not run a Fury X with my previos system and he can?
> I really wanna know.




Some people said that there will be a massive bottleneck, I didn't listen to anybody, bit the dust and bought the thing. Couldn't be happier.


----------



## jedics (Nov 26, 2017)

FilipM said:


> Some people said that there will be a massive bottleneck, I didn't listen to anybody, bit the dust and bought the thing. Couldn't be happier.


Hi there, just found out about the xeon chips and considering an upgrade from my i7920 with a gtx970 while keeping my costs down and found your post. So you don't think your xeon is bottlenecking your 1080ti?
I'm only doing think to play pubg by the way, so if you play it Id love to hear how well it runs. Also do you think there is any truth to the latest xeons like the 5690 being better overclockers because they are more recent revisions? Ive found one on ebay for about $100.......Would be pretty funny if it could feed a $1000 video card all these years later


----------



## Sasqui (Nov 26, 2017)

R-T-B said:


> No.  I'm nearly certain nvidia cards still have legacy bios modules.



On a tangential note... I was going to try putting a Vega 64 in an EVGA x58 board (with an X5670), since I wrecked my Z97 board.  Thoughts on UEFI in that case?


----------



## Kanan (Nov 26, 2017)

Capitan Harlock said:


> I'm a little surprised by what some of you guys are saying to him because if i recall 6 months ago i was asking if by just going by a w3520 (i7 920) to a X5660 i could have enough power for running a Fury X.
> Now i come here and i see people saying that with is X58 chipset he can run just fine with a 1080TI .
> How is that possible that i could not run a Fury X with my previos system and he can?
> I really wanna know.


Fury X is highly different than GTX 900/1000 series GPUs. Because of how AMD drivers work compared to Nvidia, they need strong IPC CPUs, outdated CPU's wont do any good then, you would have a bottleneck - how big, depends on the clock you'd run with the X5660. I think 4.5 GHz would be nice, 4 GHz the minimum I'd do.


jedics said:


> Hi there, just found out about the xeon chips and considering an upgrade from my i7920 with a gtx970 while keeping my costs down and found your post. So you don't think your xeon is bottlenecking your 1080ti?
> I'm only doing think to play pubg by the way, so if you play it Id love to hear how well it runs. Also do you think there is any truth to the latest xeons like the 5690 being better overclockers because they are more recent revisions? Ive found one on ebay for about $100.......Would be pretty funny if it could feed a $1000 video card all these years later


If your i7 920 is highly overclocked it can still somewhat (note: somewhat) feed a 1080 Ti, but it will bottleneck it. It also depends on how much FPS and on what resolution you want to play. If you're going for let's say 1440p/60 or 4k/60 it'll be fine. If you're going for 1440p/144 it'll be somewhat bottlenecked. Minimum fps will also be always lower. Average fps isn't everything.


Sasqui said:


> On a tangential note... I was going to try putting a Vega 64 in an EVGA x58 board (with an X5670), since I wrecked my Z97 board.  Thoughts on UEFI in that case?


Could be problematic because Vega 64 is highly different bios wise compared to AMD cards before / Nvidia, but I'd try it nonetheless. The difference is it has a security check integrated and that fucks around with PC's trying to boot it, even newer ones.


----------



## Capitan Harlock (Nov 26, 2017)

Well now is almost 1 year and i have a I7 4820k at 4.6ghz but if a 1080ti was going to be ok with a x5660 or x5670 i would have liked to know that at the time.
But i can't complain because new hw is better .


----------



## Tomgang (Nov 26, 2017)

jedics said:


> Hi there, just found out about the xeon chips and considering an upgrade from my i7920 with a gtx970 while keeping my costs down and found your post. So you don't think your xeon is bottlenecking your 1080ti?
> I'm only doing think to play pubg by the way, so if you play it Id love to hear how well it runs. Also do you think there is any truth to the latest xeons like the 5690 being better overclockers because they are more recent revisions? Ive found one on ebay for about $100.......Would be pretty funny if it could feed a $1000 video card all these years later



With one GTX 970 you are fine with an I7 920. Get that puppy up to around 4 Ghz and there is no problem at all. But since games are beginning to take advantage of 6 core CPU´s and these X58 xeon are dead cheap. I will say go for it. Make sure your board has a bios version that support the later 6 core I7 versions like mine I7 980X else the Xeon will not work and if not update bios before swapping in a Xeon. I might also be a good idea to google your morher board with a Xeon and se if others have one running in it before baying one. Some X58 desktop boards can not handle Xeon properly, so tjeck it out before you do any thing.

About GTX 1080 TI in X58. At 1080P resolution yes you will se bottleneck, but from 1600P and up you are fine but i do recomment to get a 6 core Xeon/I7 cpu if you are gonna take the jump to a 1080 TI on X58 and besides i exspirince that I7 980X over I7 920 has more grunt.. GTX 1080 TI is not ment as a 1080P card any way. If you are only running 1080P stick to a GTX 1070/1070 TI/1080 non ti.

I can also confirm that 1080 TI runs fine on X58. Been doing it for several months now and there has not been any problem so far.

Here is a firestrike score from my system. Be aware of that CPU here is oc to 4.7 Ghz (for 24/7 use i back down to 4.25 GHz because of voltage, heat and noise levels).

https://www.3dmark.com/fs/13514527

But yeah so far i have no complains about X58 with a 6 core cpu, GTX 1080 Ti and a M.2 SSD. It runs great.


----------



## Zyll Goliat (Nov 26, 2017)

Tomgang said:


> With one GTX 970 you are fine with an I7 920. Get that puppy up to around 4 Ghz and there is no problem at all. But since games are beginning to take advantage of 6 core CPU´s and these X58 xeon are dead cheap. I will say go for it. Make sure your board has a bios version that support the later 6 core I7 versions like mine I7 980X else the Xeon will not work and if not update bios before swapping in a Xeon. I might also be a good idea to google your morher board with a Xeon and se if others have one running in it before baying one. Some X58 desktop boards can not handle Xeon properly, so tjeck it out before you do any thing.
> 
> About GTX 1080 TI in X58. At 1080P resolution yes you will se bottleneck, but from 1600P and up you are fine but i do recomment to get a 6 core Xeon/I7 cpu if you are gonna take the jump to a 1080 TI on X58 and besides i exspirince that I7 980X over I7 920 has more grunt.. GTX 1080 TI is not ment as a 1080P card any way. If you are only running 1080P stick to a GTX 1070/1070 TI/1080 non ti.
> 
> ...


Thats really Nice&High score......I am curious what is your score for every day use when CPU&GPU are less clocked?


----------



## Tomgang (Nov 26, 2017)

Zyll Goliath said:


> Thats really Nice&High score......I am curious what is your score for every day use when CPU&GPU are less clocked?



Have patiens. I downloading 3dmark now. Havent tried that my self yet so i also got curious.


----------



## lexluthermiester (Nov 26, 2017)

@Tomgang Since is hasn't been mentioned[if it has, apologies, I didn't read every post], having used a 1080 on an X58/Xeon based system there are things to be aware of. The GTX1080 at 1080p, 1440p or 1600p will be bottlenecked by any of the quad-core socket 1366 cpu's, but the higher ghz versions it isn't so bad. With the 6-core cpu's they about match up as long as you are at 2.8ghz or better. At 4k it starts to swing back toward the cpu being bottlenecked. The GTX1080ti shifts the line back over to the cpu again. The 1080ti is strong enough to be bottlenecked by any of the socket 1366 cpu's, even at 4k, but not by much. But then even my i7-5820k on my main system bottlenecks a 1080ti. I'd say your setup is in a sweet-spot. Your 980X is only just barely starting to show it's age but should still serve you well until the next gen of gpu's motivate an upgrade. And the reality is it's better, gaming wise, to have your system bottleneck being the cpu instead of the gpu. So all in all, you're good.


----------



## Zyll Goliat (Nov 26, 2017)

Tomgang said:


> Have patiens. I downloading 3dmark now. Havent tried that my self yet so i also got curious.


Cheers.....BTW I am also X58 owner rocking Xeon E5645 at 4Ghz and GTX 970 scoring around 11,500 in FireStrike which was significantly better then my previous FX 8300 that could not pass 9,000 in overall score with the same GPU......


----------



## FilipM (Nov 26, 2017)

A mate of mine has a 3930K overclocked to 4.5 and a 1080Ti. So identical apart from CPU to mine. 

We both never seen a bottleneck yet. I play Rainbow Six Siege, GPU usage is maxed out for both me and him. (1080P)

Other games too, I am yet to see the CPU usage at 100% or GPU dip below 99%. Iracing, Space Engineers, World of Tanks, War Thunder and so on.


----------



## EarthDog (Nov 26, 2017)

jedics said:


> Hi there, just found out about the xeon chips and considering an upgrade from my i7920 with a gtx970 while keeping my costs down and found your post. So you don't think your xeon is bottlenecking your 1080ti?
> I'm only doing think to play pubg by the way, so if you play it Id love to hear how well it runs. Also do you think there is any truth to the latest xeons like the 5690 being better overclockers because they are more recent revisions? Ive found one on ebay for about $100.......Would be pretty funny if it could feed a $1000 video card all these years later



Yes...x58 bottlenecks a 1080ti unless you are playing at 4k. How much will vary dramatically by title from little to a lot. Pubg is optimized like a potato... my 7900x at 4.e only ramps up to low 3 ghz range to run it. But its also 50% faster ipc too.

Id sooner get a 1070 and upgrade from x58 with the money saved personally.

99% gpu use does NOT mean it is being bottlenecked.


----------



## Tomgang (Nov 26, 2017)

lexluthermiester said:


> @Tomgang Since is hasn't been mentioned[if it has, apologies, I didn't read every post], having used a 1080 on an X58/Xeon based system there are things to be aware of. The GTX1080 at 1080p, 1440p or 1600p will be bottlenecked by any of the quad-core socket 1366 cpu's, but the higher ghz versions it isn't so bad. With the 6-core cpu's they about match up as long as you are at 2.8ghz or better. At 4k it starts to swing back toward the cpu being bottlenecked. The GTX1080ti shifts the line back over to the cpu again. The 1080ti is strong enough to be bottlenecked by any of the socket 1366 cpu's, even at 4k, but not by much. But then even my i7-5820k on my main system bottlenecks a 1080ti. I'd say your setup is in a sweet-spot. Your 980X is only just barely starting to show it's age but should still serve you well until the next gen of gpu's motivate an upgrade. And the reality is it's better, gaming wise, to have your system bottleneck being the cpu instead of the gpu. So all in all, you're good.



Running a Quad-core X58 cpu with a new high-end GPU shut al ways be oc as high as possible. But then it also can run really great. Ran a I7 920 at 4.1 GHz with GTX 970 SLI before and that ran any game with no trouble at all. But yeah i do agrees if you are going on for a GTX 1080 or TI a 6 core CPU is not a bad idea. the 6 core chips has more grunt not only because of more cores, they also oc better and has more L3 cashe that helps performance as well.

Here is a score from then i had I7 920 and GTX 970 SLI. CPU ran here 4.41 GHz but at 24/7 use 4.1 GHz and the two GTX 970 are OC to there very limit back then.









Zyll Goliath said:


> Cheers.....BTW I am also X58 owner rocking Xeon E5645 at 4Ghz and GTX 970 scoring around 11,500 in FireStrike which was significantly better then my previous FX 8300 that could not pass 9,000 in overall score with the same GPU......



AMD bulldozer cpu is just plain weak when it comes to IPC, sure X58 is not king of the hill any logger either. But its better than bulldozer for sure. Well in coming score with 24/7 oc clocks on CPU as well a GPU.






https://www.3dmark.com/3dm/23576988?


----------



## Zyll Goliat (Nov 26, 2017)

Tomgang said:


> AMD bulldozer cpu is just plain weak when it comes to IPC, sure X58 is not king of the hill any logger either. But its better than bulldozer for sure. Well in coming score with 24/7 oc clocks on CPU as well a GPU.
> 
> 
> 
> ...




Sure I agree about FX and that was the reason I switched on X58 platform that didn´t cost me almost nothing but to be honest as I usually play games on 3 monitor setup I must said that even the FX don´t bottleneck GPU on Higher Res.....but yeah 1080p is another story...
P.S. Thats Still an EXCELLENT FireStrike Score


----------



## Tomgang (Nov 26, 2017)

Zyll Goliath said:


> Sure I agree about FX and that was the reason I switched on X58 that didn´t cost me nothing but to be honest as I usually play games on 3 monitor setup I must said that even the FX don´t bottleneck GPU on Higher Res.....but yeah 1080p is another story...



Correct. the higher resolution the less bottleneck there is. But i think i want to get GTX 1080 TI SLI and oc cpu to 6 Ghz then i just maybe can run tetris at 800x600 above 30 FPS


----------



## Frag_Maniac (Nov 26, 2017)

Just slapped an EVGA 1080 Ti FTW3 on my ASUS P6X58D-E MB with a mere 8GB RAM, and so far I'm surprised at how well it's doing. So far I've tested titles like Battlefield 1 and Wolfenstein 2 at max settings with 4K equivalent (200%) res scaling on BF1. It was dodgy at first with BF1. No trouble until I got to the mission in the Dolomites, where there was a lot of hitching. Running the command to use 8 CPU cores and enabling HT on my i7-950, plus switching to D11 made a HUGE difference. Seems to me Dx12 mode is buggy in that game. Smooth as butter in Wolfenstein 2 as well. Just got to the Manhattan Ruins level, and no sign of lag or hitching when it loads like with the 7970. Frame rates are 70 or more average on BF1 at 4k equivalent, and pretty much same on Wolf 2.

If you're planning a big upgrade and are worried about putting an expensive GPU on an X58, or even old Nehalem, don't be. I'm not saying those wanting best performance will be satisfied long term, but to assist a "little-at-a-time" upgrade, both X58 and Nehalem will be there for you. In a few months or so I plan to complete the upgrade with a 8700k, Z370 MB, and 16GB DDR4, 3000 or 3200 depending on prices. Next up I'll be testing Ghost Recon Wildlands, but that I'm reserving for when I get my 4K TV tomorrow.


----------



## EarthDog (Nov 26, 2017)

Ahh, good for the less than 1% who play at 4k or have the horsepower to scale there...

And for those that rock 1080p (overwhelming majority) and a fast card...... beware of glass ceiling! Though, indeed, there are more fps benefits to adding an OP gpu for the system than to upgrade the system.


----------



## Tomgang (Nov 26, 2017)

Frag Maniac said:


> Just slapped an EVGA 1080 Ti FTW3 on my ASUS P6X58D-E MB with a mere 8GB RAM, and so far I'm surprised at how well it's doing. So far I've tested titles like Battlefield 1 and Wolfenstein 2 at max settings with 4K equivalent (200%) res scaling on BF1. It was dodgy at first with BF1. No trouble until I got to the mission in the Dolomites, where there was a lot of hitching. Running the command to use 8 CPU cores and enabling HT on my i7-950, plus switching to D11 made a HUGE difference. Seems to me Dx12 mode is buggy in that game. Smooth as butter in Wolfenstein 2 as well. Just got to the Manhattan Ruins level, and no sign of lag or hitching when it loads like with the 7970. Frame rates are 70 or more average on BF1 at 4k equivalent, and pretty much same on Wolf 2.
> 
> If you're planning a big upgrade and are worried about putting an expensive GPU on an X58, or even old Nehalem, don't be. I'm not saying those wanting best performance will be satisfied long term, but to assist a "little-at-a-time" upgrade, both X58 and Nehalem will be there for you. In a few months or so I plan to complete the upgrade with a 8700k, Z370 MB, and 16GB DDR4, 3000 or 3200 depending on prices. Next up I'll be testing Ghost Recon Wildlands, but that I'm reserving for when I get my 4K TV tomorrow.



Great even the quads can do it. But i bet the quads has more bottleneck at 1080p than there newer 6 core parts. I fact i know thats the case. I got a bit more fps in games with 980x over i7 920 with nearly identical clocks with gtx 970 sli. Nut much, but still a bit better.

And to others that runs 8 gb in there x58, i strogly reccoment getting 12 gb ram for 4k and remember x58 performence bedst with triple channel that mean use 3 or 6 memory sticks.


----------



## Frag_Maniac (Nov 27, 2017)

EarthDog said:


> Ahh, good for the less than 1% who play at 4k or have the horsepower to scale there...
> 
> And for those that rock 1080p (overwhelming majority) and a fast card...... beware of glass ceiling! Though, indeed, there are more fps benefits to adding an OP gpu for the system than to upgrade the system.



Actually my initial intent wasn't as much 4K as you might think. I have a very small living room, and for me it's more space and cost efficient if I go with an all in one display, TV. That means that TV also has to be very good at handling gaming. The TVs I'd narrowed my choices down to were the 43" Sony X800D and  49" X900E, both rated pretty well for gaming at RTINGS.com. The X800D can be tuned to close to IPS quality color, but the X900E's processing is not only IPS equivalent out of the box, it's near OLED quality.

So I figured since the TV is going to be 4K, I better get a very good GPU in case scaling to 1440p doesn't yield the stellar results reported by gamers on these TVs. Plus I'll be jumping from 32" to 49" at the same 6.5' viewing distance for gaming, so I wanted to keep the pixels small.

I fully understand those whom want to or are content with staying at 1080p though, especially those with smaller than 40" displays. 4k GPU power is quite an investment, but I can't say I'm displeased at all so far, even though it's less bang for buck. That said, there's times I wish there were 32"-34" 1440p monitors with built in TV tuners (add-on ones can be a software and support nightmare), but no such thing exists. It would likely be way too small a market to compete with the TVs that game well. They DO however have a much longer warranty.





Tomgang said:


> And to others that runs 8 gb in there x58, i strogly reccoment getting 12 gb ram for 4k and remember x58 performence bedst with triple channel that mean use 3 or 6 memory sticks.


The way I did it was add another Kingston HyperX 2GB module to my 3x2GB setup. Back then 8GB was plenty sufficient, and when I discovered my MB manual said you can still run dual channel mode with 4x2GB, it was a no brainer.


----------



## Sasqui (Nov 28, 2017)

JackOne said:


> Could be problematic because Vega 64 is highly different bios wise compared to AMD cards before / Nvidia, but I'd try it nonetheless. The differenc



Plugged it (Vega 64) in last night to my EVGA x58 board and x5670 with a whopping 6gb RAM.

Worked flawlessly, I'll start another thread here at some point.  Ran Firestrike (free version) and got blistering speeds over the gtx1060 6gb I tried in the same rig about 3 mo. back.  A little fan noise but the card never got over 60c, even when I ran FS Ultra (I have 3DMark on Steam).

Along with an 32" ultra wide LG 3220x1440, the visuals were absolutely the best I've ever had the pleasure of seeing and I haven't even plugged in DP cable yet, so the panel is only running at 50hz!  Couldn't be more pleased.



Frag Maniac said:


> The way I did it was add another Kingston HyperX 2GB module to my 3x2GB setup. Back then 8GB was plenty sufficient, and when I discovered my MB manual said you can still run dual channel mode with 4x2GB, it was a no brainer.



With some combing through one of my x58 manuals (ASUS or EVGA), I was surprised to find the same thing.  Finding 2x dual channel DDR3 kits is pretty easy.  One triple channel kit not so much.


----------

