EVGA

Hot!How are 3080's performing with 5120x2160 displays

Author
Ciddharthas
Superclocked Member
  • Total Posts : 196
  • Reward points : 0
  • Joined: 2020/09/17 07:58:09
  • Location: Boulder, CO, USA
  • Status: offline
  • Ribbons : 0
2020/10/22 09:28:52 (permalink)
So I'm a big fan of ultrawide monitors.  I've had an alienware aw3418dw (3440x1440) for a couple of years that I love, but I'd really like to jump to 2160p.  I've been keeping an eye out for a good 2160p ultrawide hdr monitor with a decent refresh rate (at least 100-120Hz ideally) and around 34 inches.  There isn't one out yet that quite checks all my boxes, but there are a few that come close (there's an LG that's out but only has a 60Hz refresh rate for instance), and I'm sure more will come out soon.  But since a 2160p ultrawide monitor is pushing something like 33% more pixels than a 16:9 4k monitor, I'm wondering if a 3080 can really handle it.
 
So, is anyone here using a 3080 to drive a 2160p ultrawide monitor?  How does it perform if so?

CPU: i7 10700k @ 5.1GHz with 280mm Corsair H115i Elite Capellix cooler
MB: MSI Z490 Meg Ace
RAM: 64gb Corsair Dominator Platinum RGB @ 3600MHz 16-16-16-36
GPU: EVGA 3080 FTW3 Ultra (soon to be hybrid hopefully)
SSD: Samsung 970 Evo Plus NVMe: 2tb x 2
PSU: Corsair HX1000i (1000 watts)
Main Monitor: Alienware 3418DW 1440p ultra-wide @ 120Hz
Keyboard: Corsair K95 Platinum RGB
Mouse: Corsair Scimitar Elite RGB
Headset: Arctis Pro Wireless
Mic: Elgato Wave 3
VR: Occulus Quest 2
#1

15 Replies Related Threads

    ramen_n
    New Member
    • Total Posts : 15
    • Reward points : 0
    • Joined: 2020/10/05 21:19:05
    • Status: offline
    • Ribbons : 0
    Re: How are 3080's performing with 5120x2160 displays 2020/10/22 10:24:29 (permalink)
    I have 5120x2160 monitor. In destiny 2 I hold 100fps max settings. Borderlands 3 I get 70fps, ultra settings.
    #2
    Ciddharthas
    Superclocked Member
    • Total Posts : 196
    • Reward points : 0
    • Joined: 2020/09/17 07:58:09
    • Location: Boulder, CO, USA
    • Status: offline
    • Ribbons : 0
    Re: How are 3080's performing with 5120x2160 displays 2020/10/22 16:31:30 (permalink)
    Thanks for the response, Ramen.  That’s better than I thought it would be.

    CPU: i7 10700k @ 5.1GHz with 280mm Corsair H115i Elite Capellix cooler
    MB: MSI Z490 Meg Ace
    RAM: 64gb Corsair Dominator Platinum RGB @ 3600MHz 16-16-16-36
    GPU: EVGA 3080 FTW3 Ultra (soon to be hybrid hopefully)
    SSD: Samsung 970 Evo Plus NVMe: 2tb x 2
    PSU: Corsair HX1000i (1000 watts)
    Main Monitor: Alienware 3418DW 1440p ultra-wide @ 120Hz
    Keyboard: Corsair K95 Platinum RGB
    Mouse: Corsair Scimitar Elite RGB
    Headset: Arctis Pro Wireless
    Mic: Elgato Wave 3
    VR: Occulus Quest 2
    #3
    jamexr
    Superclocked Member
    • Total Posts : 167
    • Reward points : 0
    • Joined: 2016/07/21 16:30:16
    • Location: SLC, Utah, USA
    • Status: offline
    • Ribbons : 0
    Re: How are 3080's performing with 5120x2160 displays 2020/10/23 23:21:08 (permalink)
    You meant 5120x1440 right? I don’t think there is a 5120x2160 Super ultrawide, i have a 49’ and handles it well, it’s a million pixels less than 4K. The only issue is that some games that use DLSS don’t support that resolution like Control (since DLSS isn’t supported I have to set ray tracing to medium and get around 50fps, with high goes to low 30s). I hope more games support super ultrawide.
    #4
    Dabadger84
    SSC Member
    • Total Posts : 640
    • Reward points : 0
    • Joined: 2018/05/11 23:49:52
    • Location: de_Overpass, USA
    • Status: online
    • Ribbons : 2
    Re: How are 3080's performing with 5120x2160 displays 2020/10/23 23:51:29 (permalink)
    5120 x 2160 is 4K 21 by 9 resolution.
     
    I am running GTA V upscaled to this resolution (1.5x scaling) from 3440 x 1440 on my current monitor, not that GTA V is a modern game or any indication of "great performance" by the card, but with settings maxed (except AA because it's not really necessary at that resolution, especially when you're upscaling), I'm seeing 50-60fps in the worst performing areas, with in city & most of the time being 85-100FPS (with my GSync/VSync capped at 100Hz).
     
    That's going to be my next planned resolution as well, nice 34 or 38" monitor with 21 by 9 4K resolution, but I'll be waiting for those monitors to come in under the $1250 mark with good refresh rates.
     
    I'll comment back if I run any other games with reso-upscaling to that resolution on how they perform.

    Save up to 10% on eVGA.com purchases, use Associates Code: 47AQQ6KPU2IZNXY
    Thermaltake View 91 (Thicc & RGBed ^_^) ~ i9 9900k @ 5GHz 1.31V ~ Gigabyte Z390 AORUS Master ~ eVGA 1200W P2 Platinum PSU
    4x8GB G.Skill TridentZ F4-3600C16Q-32GTZR @ 4000MHz CL17-17-17-38-2T @ 1.42V
    eVGA RTX 3080 FTW3 Ultra @ 1980MHz 875mV or 2070MHz 994mV
    Alienware AW3418DW Ultrawide (3440x1440 @ 100/120Hz) ~ Logitech G502 SE Mouse ~ SteelSeries QcK Heavy
     eVGA Z10 RGB Gaming (Brown Switches) Keyboard ~ Logitech G Pro X Headset / Creative SoundBlaster X-Fi USB card

    #5
    Jacob.jenson6
    New Member
    • Total Posts : 51
    • Reward points : 0
    • Joined: 2019/01/28 17:10:26
    • Location: utah... where all hardware must be ordered online.
    • Status: offline
    • Ribbons : 0
    Re: How are 3080's performing with 5120x2160 displays 2020/10/24 09:33:50 (permalink)
    5120x1440 performance has been excellent on my 3090.
    Finally a card that'll actually run games like RDR2 at over 40 fps with everything maxed.

    https://www.modsrigs.com/detail.aspx?BuildID=42222
    #6
    irakandjii
    New Member
    • Total Posts : 52
    • Reward points : 0
    • Joined: 2020/09/01 12:15:00
    • Status: offline
    • Ribbons : 0
    Re: How are 3080's performing with 5120x2160 displays 2020/10/24 10:33:59 (permalink)
    I have been considering the MSI version of this monitor.  What held be back was the lack of g-sync.  I seems this is not bothering you?
    #7
    Ciddharthas
    Superclocked Member
    • Total Posts : 196
    • Reward points : 0
    • Joined: 2020/09/17 07:58:09
    • Location: Boulder, CO, USA
    • Status: offline
    • Ribbons : 0
    Re: How are 3080's performing with 5120x2160 displays 2020/10/24 13:07:04 (permalink)
    I'll just throw this in here for clarity's sake:
     
     
    Why "4k" is a stupid term that we all pretty much have to use anyway
     
    I've never like the term "4k" because there was never any need for it in the first place and now it needlessly complicates things due to there being ultrawide and super-ultrawide monitors.  4k was meant to describe the number of vertical lines of pixels in a display.  It was stupid of the industry to introduce this term to begin with because for decades now, resolutions were described in terms of horizontal lines - 480p, 720p, 1080i, 1080p, etc.  There was zero reason to change that.  When "4k" came out, it was used to describe 3840x2160 displays (which is a 16:9 ratio).  3840 was close enough to 4000 for them to call it a 4k display, although calling it a 2k display would have made just as much sense - or more sense really since it goes by the same naming standards that we've always used and would have avoided problems with ultrawide resolutions.  If you have a 1440p ultrawide (ultrawide usually meaning 21:9) monitor, that's 3440x1440, which incidentally is just shy of 5 million pixels, whereas traditional (16:9) 4k displays, being 3840x2160, are a little over 8 million pixels.
     
    What people usually refer to as "4k ultrawide" typically means 5120x2160.  Note that none of those numbers are close to 4000, hence LG and some others calling them 5k2k displays.  It's the same number of horizontal lines as a 16:9 4k display, but there are more vertical lines.  There are also a little more than 11 million pixels.  When figuring out how a video card will perform, it's really all about the number of pixels it's driving as opposed to how many horizontal or vertical lines there are.  So going from a 1440p ultrawide (3440x1440) to a 2160p ultrawide (5120x2160) will involve driving a little more than twice as many pixels (11 million as opposed to 5 million).  Going from a 4k 16:9 display (3840x2160) to what we'll call a 5k2k (or what some people call 4k ultrawide) display (5120x2160) involves pushing about 33% more pixels. (11 million as opposed to roughly 8 million).

    CPU: i7 10700k @ 5.1GHz with 280mm Corsair H115i Elite Capellix cooler
    MB: MSI Z490 Meg Ace
    RAM: 64gb Corsair Dominator Platinum RGB @ 3600MHz 16-16-16-36
    GPU: EVGA 3080 FTW3 Ultra (soon to be hybrid hopefully)
    SSD: Samsung 970 Evo Plus NVMe: 2tb x 2
    PSU: Corsair HX1000i (1000 watts)
    Main Monitor: Alienware 3418DW 1440p ultra-wide @ 120Hz
    Keyboard: Corsair K95 Platinum RGB
    Mouse: Corsair Scimitar Elite RGB
    Headset: Arctis Pro Wireless
    Mic: Elgato Wave 3
    VR: Occulus Quest 2
    #8
    Dabadger84
    SSC Member
    • Total Posts : 640
    • Reward points : 0
    • Joined: 2018/05/11 23:49:52
    • Location: de_Overpass, USA
    • Status: online
    • Ribbons : 2
    Re: How are 3080's performing with 5120x2160 displays 2020/10/24 20:11:51 (permalink)
    Ciddharthas
    I'll just throw this in here for clarity's sake:
     
     
    Why "4k" is a stupid term that we all pretty much have to use anyway
     
    I've never like the term "4k" because there was never any need for it in the first place and now it needlessly complicates things due to there being ultrawide and super-ultrawide monitors.  4k was meant to describe the number of vertical lines of pixels in a display.  It was stupid of the industry to introduce this term to begin with because for decades now, resolutions were described in terms of horizontal lines - 480p, 720p, 1080i, 1080p, etc.  There was zero reason to change that.  When "4k" came out, it was used to describe 3840x2160 displays (which is a 16:9 ratio).  3840 was close enough to 4000 for them to call it a 4k display, although calling it a 2k display would have made just as much sense - or more sense really since it goes by the same naming standards that we've always used and would have avoided problems with ultrawide resolutions.  If you have a 1440p ultrawide (ultrawide usually meaning 21:9) monitor, that's 3440x1440, which incidentally is just shy of 5 million pixels, whereas traditional (16:9) 4k displays, being 3840x2160, are a little over 8 million pixels.
     
    What people usually refer to as "4k ultrawide" typically means 5120x2160.  Note that none of those numbers are close to 4000, hence LG and some others calling them 5k2k displays.  It's the same number of horizontal lines as a 16:9 4k display, but there are more vertical lines.  There are also a little more than 11 million pixels.  When figuring out how a video card will perform, it's really all about the number of pixels it's driving as opposed to how many horizontal or vertical lines there are.  So going from a 1440p ultrawide (3440x1440) to a 2160p ultrawide (5120x2160) will involve driving a little more than twice as many pixels (11 million as opposed to 5 million).  Going from a 4k 16:9 display (3840x2160) to what we'll call a 5k2k (or what some people call 4k ultrawide) display (5120x2160) involves pushing about 33% more pixels. (11 million as opposed to roughly 8 million).




    The naming conventions drive me bonkers too.  "4K" should be called 2160p or something at all times in my opinion, but everyone & their mother calls it 4K.
    Going from 1440p ultrawide to 2160p ultrawide is indeed a large jump in pixels & thereby horsepower required to drive such pixels, some people don't understand why people like us WANT Ultrawide benchmark numbers for games... because otherwise we have to "guesstimate" based on 1440p & "4K" 2160p numbers for game results, and usually we're about right in the middle, since 3440 by 1440 is an extra half-monitor worth of pixels, basically, compared to regular 16 by 9 1440p.  Going up to Ultrawide 2160p is gigantic... 
    Like I said in my post, that resolution does look & run well on my 3080, in GTA V at least, haven't run it in other games yet, hoping other games also have the resolution scaling option so that I can run that instead of anti-aliasing... it seems like going from 3440 x 1440 to 5120 x 2160 with 2x MSAA is less of a performance hit than running 8x MSAA at 3440 x 1440, at least in that title, and it looks just as good/better in most cases.  My brain is trying to figure out how I could effectively run 2580 x 1080p (which is the next 21 by 9 step down) with 8x MSAA just to see what it looks like... would that be 3/4 scaling (think so).
    I'm interested in what theyre going to do for the 3840 x 1600 class of monitors next.  That resolution doesn't seem to have caught on much, but it seems like it fits really well with 38" ultrawides.  Ideally I'd like a 2160p ultrawide 38" monitor to come about, preferably with 120Hz, but I imagine those won't be in the sub 1250 dollar mark price point for years even if they come out this year.

    Save up to 10% on eVGA.com purchases, use Associates Code: 47AQQ6KPU2IZNXY
    Thermaltake View 91 (Thicc & RGBed ^_^) ~ i9 9900k @ 5GHz 1.31V ~ Gigabyte Z390 AORUS Master ~ eVGA 1200W P2 Platinum PSU
    4x8GB G.Skill TridentZ F4-3600C16Q-32GTZR @ 4000MHz CL17-17-17-38-2T @ 1.42V
    eVGA RTX 3080 FTW3 Ultra @ 1980MHz 875mV or 2070MHz 994mV
    Alienware AW3418DW Ultrawide (3440x1440 @ 100/120Hz) ~ Logitech G502 SE Mouse ~ SteelSeries QcK Heavy
     eVGA Z10 RGB Gaming (Brown Switches) Keyboard ~ Logitech G Pro X Headset / Creative SoundBlaster X-Fi USB card

    #9
    Ciddharthas
    Superclocked Member
    • Total Posts : 196
    • Reward points : 0
    • Joined: 2020/09/17 07:58:09
    • Location: Boulder, CO, USA
    • Status: offline
    • Ribbons : 0
    Re: How are 3080's performing with 5120x2160 displays 2020/10/25 08:38:24 (permalink)
    Dabadger84
    Ciddharthas
    I'll just throw this in here for clarity's sake:
     
     
    Why "4k" is a stupid term that we all pretty much have to use anyway
     
    I've never like the term "4k" because there was never any need for it in the first place and now it needlessly complicates things due to there being ultrawide and super-ultrawide monitors.  4k was meant to describe the number of vertical lines of pixels in a display.  It was stupid of the industry to introduce this term to begin with because for decades now, resolutions were described in terms of horizontal lines - 480p, 720p, 1080i, 1080p, etc.  There was zero reason to change that.  When "4k" came out, it was used to describe 3840x2160 displays (which is a 16:9 ratio).  3840 was close enough to 4000 for them to call it a 4k display, although calling it a 2k display would have made just as much sense - or more sense really since it goes by the same naming standards that we've always used and would have avoided problems with ultrawide resolutions.  If you have a 1440p ultrawide (ultrawide usually meaning 21:9) monitor, that's 3440x1440, which incidentally is just shy of 5 million pixels, whereas traditional (16:9) 4k displays, being 3840x2160, are a little over 8 million pixels.
     
    What people usually refer to as "4k ultrawide" typically means 5120x2160.  Note that none of those numbers are close to 4000, hence LG and some others calling them 5k2k displays.  It's the same number of horizontal lines as a 16:9 4k display, but there are more vertical lines.  There are also a little more than 11 million pixels.  When figuring out how a video card will perform, it's really all about the number of pixels it's driving as opposed to how many horizontal or vertical lines there are.  So going from a 1440p ultrawide (3440x1440) to a 2160p ultrawide (5120x2160) will involve driving a little more than twice as many pixels (11 million as opposed to 5 million).  Going from a 4k 16:9 display (3840x2160) to what we'll call a 5k2k (or what some people call 4k ultrawide) display (5120x2160) involves pushing about 33% more pixels. (11 million as opposed to roughly 8 million).




    The naming conventions drive me bonkers too.  "4K" should be called 2160p or something at all times in my opinion, but everyone & their mother calls it 4K.
    Going from 1440p ultrawide to 2160p ultrawide is indeed a large jump in pixels & thereby horsepower required to drive such pixels, some people don't understand why people like us WANT Ultrawide benchmark numbers for games... because otherwise we have to "guesstimate" based on 1440p & "4K" 2160p numbers for game results, and usually we're about right in the middle, since 3440 by 1440 is an extra half-monitor worth of pixels, basically, compared to regular 16 by 9 1440p.  Going up to Ultrawide 2160p is gigantic... 
    Like I said in my post, that resolution does look & run well on my 3080, in GTA V at least, haven't run it in other games yet, hoping other games also have the resolution scaling option so that I can run that instead of anti-aliasing... it seems like going from 3440 x 1440 to 5120 x 2160 with 2x MSAA is less of a performance hit than running 8x MSAA at 3440 x 1440, at least in that title, and it looks just as good/better in most cases.  My brain is trying to figure out how I could effectively run 2580 x 1080p (which is the next 21 by 9 step down) with 8x MSAA just to see what it looks like... would that be 3/4 scaling (think so).
    I'm interested in what theyre going to do for the 3840 x 1600 class of monitors next.  That resolution doesn't seem to have caught on much, but it seems like it fits really well with 38" ultrawides.  Ideally I'd like a 2160p ultrawide 38" monitor to come about, preferably with 120Hz, but I imagine those won't be in the sub 1250 dollar mark price point for years even if they come out this year.


     +1
     
    Yeah I really wish there were ultrawide benchmarks available too.  This LG monitor looks pretty nice if you're interested in a 1600p ultrawide:

    https://www.lg.com/us/monitors/lg-38GL950G-B-gaming-monitor
     
    144Hz, g-sync, and HDR, although it's not as bright as some other HDR monitors.  Like you, I'm hoping that a good 2160p ultrawide HDR monitor with a decent refresh rate (at least 120Hz ideally), and at least 34 inches comes out sometime soon.  There are a few 2160p ultrawides out there, but they top out at 60 Hz so far from what I've read.  Apparently HDR doesn't eat up as much GPU bandwidth as one might think since the "extra" colors are generally already calculated by GPU's even without HDR monitors.  They just round the floating point decimal that represents a given color to a less accurate degree for non-HDR monitors.

    CPU: i7 10700k @ 5.1GHz with 280mm Corsair H115i Elite Capellix cooler
    MB: MSI Z490 Meg Ace
    RAM: 64gb Corsair Dominator Platinum RGB @ 3600MHz 16-16-16-36
    GPU: EVGA 3080 FTW3 Ultra (soon to be hybrid hopefully)
    SSD: Samsung 970 Evo Plus NVMe: 2tb x 2
    PSU: Corsair HX1000i (1000 watts)
    Main Monitor: Alienware 3418DW 1440p ultra-wide @ 120Hz
    Keyboard: Corsair K95 Platinum RGB
    Mouse: Corsair Scimitar Elite RGB
    Headset: Arctis Pro Wireless
    Mic: Elgato Wave 3
    VR: Occulus Quest 2
    #10
    orkan
    New Member
    • Total Posts : 70
    • Reward points : 0
    • Joined: 2020/09/24 06:00:54
    • Status: offline
    • Ribbons : 0
    Re: How are 3080's performing with 5120x2160 displays 2020/10/25 09:23:30 (permalink)
    Who makes a 5120x2160? 
     
    #11
    tonippo
    New Member
    • Total Posts : 64
    • Reward points : 0
    • Joined: 2018/01/19 22:09:31
    • Location: Illinois
    • Status: offline
    • Ribbons : 0
    Re: How are 3080's performing with 5120x2160 displays 2020/10/25 10:08:40 (permalink)
    Dabadger84
    Ciddharthas
    I'll just throw this in here for clarity's sake:
     
     
    Why "4k" is a stupid term that we all pretty much have to use anyway
     
    I've never like the term "4k" because there was never any need for it in the first place and now it needlessly complicates things due to there being ultrawide and super-ultrawide monitors.  4k was meant to describe the number of vertical lines of pixels in a display.  It was stupid of the industry to introduce this term to begin with because for decades now, resolutions were described in terms of horizontal lines - 480p, 720p, 1080i, 1080p, etc.  There was zero reason to change that.  When "4k" came out, it was used to describe 3840x2160 displays (which is a 16:9 ratio).  3840 was close enough to 4000 for them to call it a 4k display, although calling it a 2k display would have made just as much sense - or more sense really since it goes by the same naming standards that we've always used and would have avoided problems with ultrawide resolutions.  If you have a 1440p ultrawide (ultrawide usually meaning 21:9) monitor, that's 3440x1440, which incidentally is just shy of 5 million pixels, whereas traditional (16:9) 4k displays, being 3840x2160, are a little over 8 million pixels.
     
    What people usually refer to as "4k ultrawide" typically means 5120x2160.  Note that none of those numbers are close to 4000, hence LG and some others calling them 5k2k displays.  It's the same number of horizontal lines as a 16:9 4k display, but there are more vertical lines.  There are also a little more than 11 million pixels.  When figuring out how a video card will perform, it's really all about the number of pixels it's driving as opposed to how many horizontal or vertical lines there are.  So going from a 1440p ultrawide (3440x1440) to a 2160p ultrawide (5120x2160) will involve driving a little more than twice as many pixels (11 million as opposed to 5 million).  Going from a 4k 16:9 display (3840x2160) to what we'll call a 5k2k (or what some people call 4k ultrawide) display (5120x2160) involves pushing about 33% more pixels. (11 million as opposed to roughly 8 million).




    The naming conventions drive me bonkers too.  "4K" should be called 2160p or something at all times in my opinion, but everyone & their mother calls it 4K.
    Going from 1440p ultrawide to 2160p ultrawide is indeed a large jump in pixels & thereby horsepower required to drive such pixels, some people don't understand why people like us WANT Ultrawide benchmark numbers for games... because otherwise we have to "guesstimate" based on 1440p & "4K" 2160p numbers for game results, and usually we're about right in the middle, since 3440 by 1440 is an extra half-monitor worth of pixels, basically, compared to regular 16 by 9 1440p.  Going up to Ultrawide 2160p is gigantic... 
    Like I said in my post, that resolution does look & run well on my 3080, in GTA V at least, haven't run it in other games yet, hoping other games also have the resolution scaling option so that I can run that instead of anti-aliasing... it seems like going from 3440 x 1440 to 5120 x 2160 with 2x MSAA is less of a performance hit than running 8x MSAA at 3440 x 1440, at least in that title, and it looks just as good/better in most cases.  My brain is trying to figure out how I could effectively run 2580 x 1080p (which is the next 21 by 9 step down) with 8x MSAA just to see what it looks like... would that be 3/4 scaling (think so).
    I'm interested in what theyre going to do for the 3840 x 1600 class of monitors next.  That resolution doesn't seem to have caught on much, but it seems like it fits really well with 38" ultrawides.  Ideally I'd like a 2160p ultrawide 38" monitor to come about, preferably with 120Hz, but I imagine those won't be in the sub 1250 dollar mark price point for years even if they come out this year.


     are you Able to use a 5780x1080p resolution to see if you like it?.

     
    I9-10850k - Z490 ASUS ROG Strix Gaming E - 64GB DDR4 3600MHz G-Skill Neo - x2 Samsung M.2 1T 970 Evo Plus - 3080 XC3 ULTRA - Dual Custom Weather cooled System - Lian li 011 Dynamic - Lian li Uni-Fan - Triple Acer 27" Monitor 1080p at 144MHz - And More........ 
    #12
    Ciddharthas
    Superclocked Member
    • Total Posts : 196
    • Reward points : 0
    • Joined: 2020/09/17 07:58:09
    • Location: Boulder, CO, USA
    • Status: offline
    • Ribbons : 0
    Re: How are 3080's performing with 5120x2160 displays 2020/10/25 10:13:25 (permalink)
    orkan
    Who makes a 5120x2160? 
     




    This is probably the nicest one out currently:
     
    https://www.lg.com/us/monitors/lg-34WK95U-W-ultrawide-monitor
     
    It’s only 60Hz though.  

    CPU: i7 10700k @ 5.1GHz with 280mm Corsair H115i Elite Capellix cooler
    MB: MSI Z490 Meg Ace
    RAM: 64gb Corsair Dominator Platinum RGB @ 3600MHz 16-16-16-36
    GPU: EVGA 3080 FTW3 Ultra (soon to be hybrid hopefully)
    SSD: Samsung 970 Evo Plus NVMe: 2tb x 2
    PSU: Corsair HX1000i (1000 watts)
    Main Monitor: Alienware 3418DW 1440p ultra-wide @ 120Hz
    Keyboard: Corsair K95 Platinum RGB
    Mouse: Corsair Scimitar Elite RGB
    Headset: Arctis Pro Wireless
    Mic: Elgato Wave 3
    VR: Occulus Quest 2
    #13
    Ciddharthas
    Superclocked Member
    • Total Posts : 196
    • Reward points : 0
    • Joined: 2020/09/17 07:58:09
    • Location: Boulder, CO, USA
    • Status: offline
    • Ribbons : 0
    Re: How are 3080's performing with 5120x2160 displays 2020/10/25 10:14:38 (permalink)

    CPU: i7 10700k @ 5.1GHz with 280mm Corsair H115i Elite Capellix cooler
    MB: MSI Z490 Meg Ace
    RAM: 64gb Corsair Dominator Platinum RGB @ 3600MHz 16-16-16-36
    GPU: EVGA 3080 FTW3 Ultra (soon to be hybrid hopefully)
    SSD: Samsung 970 Evo Plus NVMe: 2tb x 2
    PSU: Corsair HX1000i (1000 watts)
    Main Monitor: Alienware 3418DW 1440p ultra-wide @ 120Hz
    Keyboard: Corsair K95 Platinum RGB
    Mouse: Corsair Scimitar Elite RGB
    Headset: Arctis Pro Wireless
    Mic: Elgato Wave 3
    VR: Occulus Quest 2
    #14
    rjohnson11
    EVGA Forum Moderator
    • Total Posts : 79382
    • Reward points : 0
    • Joined: 2004/10/05 12:44:35
    • Location: Europe
    • Status: offline
    • Ribbons : 71
    Re: How are 3080's performing with 5120x2160 displays 2020/10/25 10:30:30 (permalink)
    orkan
    Who makes a 5120x2160? 
     


    The best 5K and 8K monitors at a glance
    1. Phillips 499P9H 49-inch SuperWide Curved Monitor
    2. LG 49WL95C-W 49-inch Curved 32:9 Ultrawide with HDR10 and USB-C
    3. Dell UltraSharp UP3218K
    4. Dell UltraSharp 49-inch (U4919DW)
    5. MSI Prestige PS341WU 
    6. LG 27MD5K-B Ultrafine 27-inch
    7. Iiyama ProLite XB2779QQS
    8. Samsung CRG90 144hz

    Specs: AMD Ryzen 9 3950X,  M.2 2TB, 128GB DDR4  Crosshair VIII Hero, EVGA RTX 3090 FTW3 Ultra,  Associate Code: H5U80QBH6BH0AXF

    #15
    Dabadger84
    SSC Member
    • Total Posts : 640
    • Reward points : 0
    • Joined: 2018/05/11 23:49:52
    • Location: de_Overpass, USA
    • Status: online
    • Ribbons : 2
    Re: How are 3080's performing with 5120x2160 displays 2020/10/26 18:30:37 (permalink)
    Anything that's 49" is (probably) Super Ultrawide 32 by 9, and thereby not 5120 x 2160, which is 21 by 9.

    Save up to 10% on eVGA.com purchases, use Associates Code: 47AQQ6KPU2IZNXY
    Thermaltake View 91 (Thicc & RGBed ^_^) ~ i9 9900k @ 5GHz 1.31V ~ Gigabyte Z390 AORUS Master ~ eVGA 1200W P2 Platinum PSU
    4x8GB G.Skill TridentZ F4-3600C16Q-32GTZR @ 4000MHz CL17-17-17-38-2T @ 1.42V
    eVGA RTX 3080 FTW3 Ultra @ 1980MHz 875mV or 2070MHz 994mV
    Alienware AW3418DW Ultrawide (3440x1440 @ 100/120Hz) ~ Logitech G502 SE Mouse ~ SteelSeries QcK Heavy
     eVGA Z10 RGB Gaming (Brown Switches) Keyboard ~ Logitech G Pro X Headset / Creative SoundBlaster X-Fi USB card

    #16
    Jump to:
  • Back to Mobile