Will a GeForce RTX 2070 be enough to game in 4K 60hz?

P

peppergomez

2[H]4U
Joined
Sep 15, 2011
Messages
2,150
Hey all,

I posted this question in the LG 48CX thread but haven't gotten any replies. I am considering buying that monitor and only will do so if my laptop has enough power to run recent games (Subnautica, Elite Dangerous, STALKER Call of Pripyat w/ mods, etc) at a reasonable rate (above 30 frames per second) at 4K at 60hz refresh rate (I know the 2070 card doesn't do HDMI 2.1 so no 120hz refresh rate).

My laptop is an Dell/Alienware M15:
Intel(R) Core(TM) i7-8750H CPU @ 2.20GHz (12 CPUs), ~2.2GHz Memory: 32768MB RAM
Integrated Intel(R) UHD Graphics 630 x2 and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 with Max-Q Design (Display Memory: 24310 MB, Dedicated Memory: 8031 MB, Shared Memory: 16279 MB)

Looking for smooth performance at max/close to max settings at 4K, 60hz.

Later next year I will prob build a gaming desktop with one of the newer AMD or Intel cards, assuming they are available by then. Eventually will want to play Cyberpunk 2077 at 4K but prob will wait at least 4-6 months before buying it, since it'll prob take that long for it to be patched properly.

Thanks!
 
Last edited:
I'm using an 8600k and rtx 2700 with a 65" cx monitor at 4k. It's fine but I have to reduce settings. Control was awesome with ray tracing and DLSS and I play a lot of total war Warhammer with a lot of settings reduced. I'm looking to upgrade to a 3080 but I work for a living so I can't sit around in a discord chat waiting for the thirty second window to buy one.

I don't know how your laptop will perform though I've got a full desktop.
 
Oh the monitor is absolutely amazing I highly suggest going with the oled over anything else. Nothing else even compares.
 
Yes, I know the TV is great based on reading the thread here at [H]. But I don't want to buy it if my CPU and GPU don't have enough power to run it at a playable frame rate.

Is anyone else with similar specs able to game at 4K?
 
You will have to compromise on settings to get good frames (sometimes quite heavily although you can max out the older games you mentioned). Even more so with laptop parts. Only you can say if that is fine or not.
 
My opinion? Nope. A 1080ti is about the bare-minimum for 4K, and a 2080ti is not too bad.

Problem with the 2070 & 2080 is only having 8GB of VRAM. That just isn't enough for 4K. Most of the big name AAA titles i'm seeing more than 8GB of VRAM usage at 4K.

You could get the Alienware graphics card external box thing and put something better in.

At the end of the day though, a 2070Q is not good enough for 4K. You don't have the compute, and you don't have the VRAM.
 
Thanks Mchart...that is the kind of reply I was hoping to get. A blunt/realistic one. Would have been better if it had been a qualified "yes" but "no" helps me put those savings toward a new PC instead.
 
that 2070 Max-Q is more like desktop 2060 performance, definitely not a 4K card regardless of amount of VRAM. You'll probably do 4K30 ok with some lowered settings but not 60 and expect low minimums.
 
Turn down settings and you'll run okay. Won't look the best but can be playable. However, I'd buy a PC and put a better video card in it so you can play with minimal compromise.
 
DooKey said:
Turn down settings and you'll run okay. Won't look the best but can be playable. However, I'd buy a PC and put a better video card in it so you can play with minimal compromise.
Click to expand...
With that level of performance he's going to have to turn them way down, or render at 1440 and scale. It's not going to look great. Sure, it's playable, but it's not like we're talking about just turning shadows down from Ultra to High or something here.

I can't even imagine trying to push 4K on anything less than a 1080ti/2080 level of compute. I upgraded to a 1080ti for 4K when the 1080ti first came out, and even then it's not like I could run the games at max settings.

The 2070q is about on par with a desktop 980ti. That's not a 4K card, at all, unless severe sacrifices are willing to be made.
 
Mchart said:
With that level of performance he's going to have to turn them way down, or render at 1440 and scale. It's not going to look great. Sure, it's playable, but it's not like we're talking about just turning shadows down from Ultra to High or something here.
Click to expand...
I don't disagree. He'll be at near potato levels to get decent 4K performance.
 
Thanks all, this is enough feedback to make me know that the money is better spent building a better system next year and then buying the LG 48cx than buying it now and not being able to really use it properly until I have a new system. It won't feel urgent until Cyberpunk is playable, which I bet will take a few months at least. Then it's just a matter of waiting for the inventory of GPUs to become available. My decision then will be AMD vs. NVIDIA. I'm taking AMD a lot more seriously this time around if they will be able to do ray tracing by next year.
 
peppergomez said:
Thanks all, this is enough feedback to make me know that the money is better spent building a better system next year and then buying the LG 48cx than buying it now and not being able to really use it properly until I have a new system.
Click to expand...
Getting my Acer X27 is what forced me down the dark path of having to get the 1080ti, it not being enough, getting the 2080ti, and even then barely being enough. Going 4K is expensive if you want to render native.
 
Mchart said:
My opinion? Nope. A 1080ti is about the bare-minimum for 4K, and a 2080ti is not too bad.

Problem with the 2070 & 2080 is only having 8GB of VRAM. That just isn't enough for 4K. Most of the big name AAA titles i'm seeing more than 8GB of VRAM usage at 4K.

You could get the Alienware graphics card external box thing and put something better in.

At the end of the day though, a 2070Q is not good enough for 4K. You don't have the compute, and you don't have the VRAM.
Click to expand...
This. I said from the beginning that 2080 and 2080S and now even 3070 will eventually be VRAM limited at 4K in modern games. With RT and games like CyberPunk, 8GB is already a limitation with high res textures and 4K res.
 
Yeah I def want to be able to game 4K native and take advantage of the 120hz refresh rate on that LG48cx when I do finally bite the bullet and build a gaming rig, so I will wait until that is within a reasonable cost to do.
 
I prefer my 27 at 144 but its more than playable on my Dell 4k
 
I've been using an HP 30Zrw 2560x1600 IPS monitor for ages now...over a decade or around that long. It's a very old monitor but I am mostly happy with it, though I am sure I will enjoy the change from 60hz to 120hz.
 
I am running a 2070 Super w/ my 48CX.

For most games I dial settings at 4K down to High/Medium and disable AA (since I don't see a need for it at 4K).
This will usually net me around 50-60 FPS. The one exception was Total Warhammer I/II which just ran like garbage (<30 FPS).
Granted I don't play too many 2018-2020 AAA releases these days. Mostly older games and occasionally stuff like Generation Zero or Mordhau.
In really well optimized games like Doom (2016) I hit pretty consistent 120 FPS with some dips to 100 FPS on "High".

The 2070 Super is fine for a 48CX if you're willing to tweak settings and/or drop to 1440p to get to a comfortable FPS range.
 
schoolslave said:
I am running a 2070 Super w/ my 48CX.

For most games I dial settings at 4K down to High/Medium and disable AA (since I don't see a need for it at 4K).
This will usually net me around 50-60 FPS. The one exception was Total Warhammer I/II which just ran like garbage (<30 FPS).
Granted I don't play too many 2018-2020 AAA releases these days. Mostly older games and occasionally stuff like Generation Zero or Mordhau.
In really well optimized games like Doom (2016) I hit pretty consistent 120 FPS with some dips to 100 FPS on "High".

The 2070 Super is fine for a 48CX if you're willing to tweak settings and/or drop to 1440p to get to a comfortable FPS range.
Click to expand...
2070 Super is an order of magnitude faster than the 2070Q mobile version.
 
peppergomez said:
I am considering buying that monitor and only will do so if my laptop has enough power to run recent games (Subnautica, Elite Dangerous, STALKER Call of Pripyat w/ mods, etc)
Click to expand...
I think some of the thread got mislead by this statement.

A laptop would have a really hard time to run modern game at 60 fps at 4K (and look better with the setting required than upscaling instead)

But for non-recent game released in 2010 like Stalker, 2013 like Elite Dangerous (that was running over 120 fps on a GTX 970 back in the days at 1440p and is made to be rendered on 2 screen at the same time for VR), maybe, it does seem hard to find many benchmark for your exact scenario so it is not a bad idea to ask on a messge board like this.
 
LukeTbk said:
I think some of the thread got mislead by this statement.

A laptop would have a really hard time to run modern game at 60 fps at 4K (and look better with the setting required than upscaling instead)

But for non-recent game released in 2010 like Stalker, 2013 like Elite Dangerous (that was running over 120 fps on a GTX 970 back in the days at 1440p and is made to be rendered on 2 screen at the same time for VR), maybe, it does seem hard to find many benchmark for your exact scenario so it is not a bad idea to ask on a messge board like this.
Click to expand...


Ok is that a qualified "go for it" for games that haven't been released in the last few years in terms of gaming at native res 4K with high quality settings and playable (30fps+) frame rates? I think Subnautica and Elite would be the most recent games I'd play.
 
peppergomez said:
Ok is that a qualified "go for it" for games that haven't been released in the last few years in terms of gaming at native res 4K with high quality settings and playable (30fps+) frame rates? I think Subnautica and Elite would be the most recent games I'd play.
Click to expand...
No I have zero personal experience with your scenario, I am saying it is not impossible for it to both work and be worth it. (you seem to be one of the most well placed person to test those games with that hardware frankly)

One other variable, is the tv bought mostly/only for that, or you are buying a new TV anyway and considering going for that one because of it's gaming capability over the competition ?
 
OK thanks for clarifying. Yeah, I can't test 4K gaming b/c I don't own a 4K monitor, just 2560x1600 60hz HP IPS one. All games I have played using my laptop at max settings at 2560x1600 run acceptably well for me. I don't use FRAPS to measure frame rate, it's just whether the movement feels fluid. I'd say Witcher 3 modded and STALKER Call of Pripyat w/ Anomaly mod settings maxed are some of the heftier games I have played. Prey is a recent game that also ran plenty fine at max settings. I don't play fast twitch games like COD or L4D. Lately I have been enjoying some very undemanding indie games, too, like Disco Elysium.

In order of frequency, here is what I will use the computer/monitor to do:
1. Gaming
2. Movies/TV watching
3. Photo editing
 
I think you'll be OK in the games you listed.

Elite Dangerous is the only one of those I'm really familiar with, but what I found is that if you were playing in VR, even a 2080 Ti was merely "adequate" but if you play it on a monitor, it doesn't actually call for that much GPU horsepower.
 
witcher 3 cannot run native at 4k on a card equivalent to a 980ti, I had to make sacrifices to get it to run at 60fps on 3440/1440 which is about 2/3 the pixals of 4k.
 
peppergomez said:
OK thanks. If I wanted to hit 30fps, would 4k be doable?
Click to expand...
With compromise likely, anything can run with compromise.

4k is very hard on gpus, the first 'true' 4k card was perhaps the 1080ti, I ran the titan XP at the time and found it lacking ar 4k. imho the 2080ti is really the first true 4k card for getting 60fps in most titles with most settings maxed.
 
Aireoth said:
With compromise likely, anything can run with compromise.

4k is very hard on gpus, the first 'true' 4k card was perhaps the 1080ti, I ran the titan XP at the time and found it lacking ar 4k. imho the 2080ti is really the first true 4k card for getting 60fps in most titles with most settings maxed.
Click to expand...
Understood. Thanks. I ordered the lovely LG 48CX so I am both excited about the upgrade from the ancient HP ZR30w I've been using for the last decade and also dreading how badly my system will be spanked by many games when I try to run them at higher res and settings. I hope the latest AMD and NVIDIA cards are more readily available by spring at the latest.
 
peppergomez said:
Understood. Thanks. I ordered the lovely LG 48CX so I am both excited about the upgrade from the ancient HP ZR30w I've been using for the last decade and also dreading how badly my system will be spanked by many games when I try to run them at higher res and settings. I hope the latest AMD and NVIDIA cards are more readily available by spring at the latest.
Click to expand...
I am sure they will be, and don't regret the monitor, between it and the gpu its a bit of a chicken/egg scenario.
 
Aireoth said:
I am sure they will be, and don't regret the monitor, between it and the gpu its a bit of a chicken/egg scenario.
Click to expand...
Yep. Figure for the next however many months I can enjoy playing less demanding games and watching movies and TV shows, and then play some newer AAA games after building a new system when the newer GPUs are no longer so scarce. I won't be touching Cyberpunk until it's both patched and my system can handle it at native 4K w/ all the bells and whistles.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top