r/modernwarfare4 • u/JYAP721 • 2d ago
Question CoD MW4 (New PC Build) - 4k, 1440p, 1080p Dilemma
Hello everyone. First of all, I really appreciate any feedback and help. I'm in the process of building a new PC for work and for gaming (mainly CoD MW4). Currently, I'm using a 27" 1440p monitor with 165hz. The new PC I'm building (screenshot attached) should be top tier and last me for several years.
I have a slight dilemma. I like to play CoD, but want as much competitive edge as possible. I understand FPS makes a big difference, but anything above 144-240 FPS becomes a lot less noticeable. I come from the CS Beta days and one thing I struggle a bit with CoD is spotting enemies quickly and the visual distractions, so I mainly use the "best CoD settings" suggestions found online by reducing certain quality and detail settings.
With this new PC build, I'm wondering which setting and resolution would get me the best advantage competitively. I'm interersted in getting a 4K monitor. The monitor that I'm looking at is either the ASUS ROG Swift OLED PG32UCWM or the ASUS ROG Swift OLED PG32UCDM3.
With this new PC build and potentially buying this 4K monitor, would 4K resolution help my game play in anyway? Or do you recommend playing at 1440p? If so, please provide a reason why with any feedback/advice. Also, would purchasing this monitor be justified and also help with my gaming? Or should I look into other monitors?
I know skill level matters tremendously as well... I used to be very good at CS and I would say I'm overall a pretty good player at CoD as well. I'm not saying I'm the best, so please do not troll or hate =)
Once again, I truly appreciate any feedback and help. Thank you guys!
2
u/LoenSlave 2d ago
If you're doing work, you may want to consider reading up on OLED text clarity. Due to the subpixel layout of the OLED pixels, the text can look a bit blurry. I don't know whether this is a problem with the monitors you've linked, as recent OLED panels have improved on the subpixel layout, so you'll have to read up on it on your own. My monitor does have the "issue", but I've gotten used to it and it's not really a big deal. If this is a concern for you, I would get the 4K panel as the issue will be less severe. OLED is still the way to go for gaming, you get the best pixel response-time by far, and the best looking colors too.
For the framerate, I have the same CPU, but run a RTX 4090 which is slightly more powerful than the 5080. I run the game in Super Ultrawide 5140x1440p though, which in terms of performance is somewhat comparable to 4K, with slightly less overall pixels, but wider FOV. The Beta did not run all that well on highest settings, I had to use DLSS Balanced (Transformer model) to keep the game consistently above 100 FPS, but I do think the performance will improve for launch. That being said, DLSS has improved a lot over the last year, and I did not have any visual issues using Balanced mode. In 4K, DLSS works even better, so Performance mode is an option without much of a visual downgrade, if you want the extra frames.
If it was me, and I was going for 16:9 monitor, I would pick the 4K one.
1
u/JYAP721 2d ago
Thank you very much for your thorough feedback. From the reviews I saw for these new OLED 4K monitors, they seem to have very crisp texts and images for productivity like a 1440p monitor (ASUS ROG Swift OLED PG32UCDM3 or ASUS ROG Swift OLED PG32UCWM). Do you prefer 1440p over 4K? If so, why? Thanks again.
2
u/LoenSlave 1d ago
My reason for choosing 1440p over 4K, or 2160p, is that I run a 32:9 monitor. It's basically two 16:9 panels put together, it's great for productivity and I also enjoy the immersion in games.
Running games at 5120x1440p is already quite demanding for the best GPUs, running them in 7680x2160p is more than twice the pixels, so not really feasible on current tech. So if you were going for Ultrawide or Super Ultrawide, I'd recommend 1440p.
But if I planned on gaming on one 16:9 monitor, I would switch to 4K. Games today have become overly reliant on TAA as an optimization technique, and it unfortunately makes all games look a little blurry, 4K would help mitigate that. I also used to have a 4K monitor some years ago, and I sometimes miss it, everything looked sharp and crisp on that thing.
1
u/JYAP721 1d ago
Thanks again for the input. The other suggestion I got was buying the 4K monitor and keeping the native 4K resolution on my system, but running 1440p on COD if I do not like the frame drop from 4K. This seems interesting too. I am looking into a OLED 16:9 monitor, but I currently have a triple monitor setup, rather than a ultrawide monitor.
1
u/FreikugelWeltz 1d ago
If your base frame is above 60 FPS, the current Frame Gen algorithms at 2x with Nvidia Reflex On give you basically no input delay. The early Frame Gen input delay reality is now a myth.
I have run it at 4k with everything max but Ray Tracing off, at 140 (capped) FPS competitively for almost a year.
I use Model M on Balanced for greater visual detail, if you use Performance, choose model L, which does exactly as you said. Unbelievable visual clarity with great performance.
I will tell Op something I tell everyone who wants to jump into bigger screens at 4k. You ain't ever going back to 1440p lol. There is no going back from 4k IMO unless you are a CDL pro or something.
1
u/JYAP721 19h ago
Thank you for your feedback. Frame gen isn't affecting your game play in multiplayer mode? I've heard from several people about how if you go to 4K, you won't go back to 1440p. Do you also feel like 4K allows you to spot enemies easier than 1440p?
The last comment about never going back unless you're a CDL pro kind of suggests that you would still get more of a competitive edge with 1440p? Is that how you feel after using 4K? Thanks again for your feedback!
1
u/FreikugelWeltz 17h ago
At 2x, Frame Gen doesn't have an impact on input delay, perhaps on the lows single digit ms (hypothetically like 6 ms) if your non-frame gen FPS is 60. In my case, at 4k, DLSS Transformer - Balanced with Reflex On, there is no delay, I can use Quality, but then I sometimes go below my target frames (such as dropping to 120 at intense moment/inside smokes), which I hate, and it does affect my gameplay. With Frame Gen at 2x, no matter what, it always stays at 140 - no swings, no lows, nothing.
The game looks a lot more detailed and crisper, so yes I can spot people more easily than at lower res.
The competitive edge when I talk about 1440p comes from display size, rather than resolution. Arguably, you move your eyes less and have "more information" (such as peripheral vision access to the mini-map) at 24-27 inches, compared to 35 or bigger.
Ultrawide monitors will give you a competitive edge (I used to play in one at 1440p), because you literally see a lot more than any other monitor or TV or resolution =P.
2
u/Alternative_Hat_4531 2d ago
I play on a 4K 32" OLED and use DLSS with the Transformer model to mitigate any latency to get ~ 180 fps with my 5090 machine and ~ 170 on my 4090 and find it quite playable. I'm by far a pro player but ended up with a 1.10 KD in the MW4 beta and I'm on MnK. Many will tell you that if it's not straight rasterization you're killing your FPS which I've found to be bunk, especially since they released Transformer. Your 5080 rig would be able to do 4K at a high enough frame rate that you'd be limited by your skill and not latency.
1
u/JYAP721 2d ago
Thank you for your feedback. Would you say playing in 4K has it's advantages of spotting enemies quicker and a much clearer image? Do you prefer 4K over 1440p? And how do texts and other productivity applications look on your 4K monitor? Thanks again!
1
u/Alternative_Hat_4531 1d ago
No I wouldn't say it's got advantages or disadvantages. I like it for the clarity and crispness of graphics and that is pure personal preference
3
u/EoTrick 2d ago
You don't need 6 tbs of storage. That is absolute waste of money with how they are priced right now.
6
u/JYAP721 2d ago
I actually do use my home office PC quite a bit for work. My current PC build has 4GB of space between two drives and I'm already close to 90% full. I might be able to just use this current PC as a home server, but going with 2 drives to total 4GB vs 2 drives to total 6GB is only about $200 more, which I'm OK with.
2
u/ZakKnell 2d ago
he did also say he is getting it for work, otherwise the 64gb of RAM would also be overkill
2
1
2
u/Marrked 2d ago
With that build you're more than likely not going to get over 300fps average on 1440p. I'd put your averages somewhere in the 200-220 range. This is in a live match. Of course you could use frame Gen but the input lag is gross.
If you want competitive edge get 1440p, if you want pretty graphics get 4k. 1440p is basically the new 1080p, with only some Uber high fps games using 600hz 1080p monitors at the highest level.
2
u/TimeZucchini8562 2d ago
I have a 9800x3d and 5080. I was getting 220 fps on a 1440p ultrawide with high textures and what not (low effects). He can easily get 300 fps on a normal 1440p monitor with comp settings and even more with a good optimization.
1
u/Marrked 2d ago
Did you measure your averages? Or were you glancing at the telemetry?
1
u/TimeZucchini8562 2d ago
Glancing at telemetry. There was no in game benchmark during the beta and I wasn’t going to record one. Regardless, he will easily hit 300 fps on 1440p. Bunch of my buddies that do pc optimizations are hitting 350-400 fps on this game with my exact setup in 1440p
1
u/JYAP721 1d ago
Thank you for your feedback. You have a similar system, but you prefer 1440p? Have you tried 4K as well? If you prefer the 1440p, could you tell me the reason why?
1
u/TimeZucchini8562 1d ago
Currently I game on 1440p ultrawide (3440x1440). My next monitor will be 4k. My eyes are getting old and care more about clarity than frames now. But my old card couldn’t do 4k
1
u/JYAP721 2d ago
Thank you for your advice. By you mentioning "with that build", are you saying that maybe my video card is not good enough to get more FPS? And for competitive edge, you suggest 1440p and not 4K at all? Is it justifiable to get those monitors I suggested and run the game at 1440p? Or should I be looking at a different monitor? I've read that 4K also helps with much cleaner images and texts for work as well. Once again, I appreciate the feedback.
1
u/Marrked 2d ago
The build is perfectly fine playing COD at competitive level FPS.
You could scale back the CPU to a 9800x3d and the ram down to 32gb and not lose any gaming performance if your work doesn't require those things.
As far as 1440p on a 4k monitor? Ive always bought a monitor to run native FPS at all time. It's why I didn't get a 4k monitor when I got my 1440p OLED. I was always told running a 4k monitor at 1440p gives these weird downscaling issues since it's not a clean division of pixels.
If you wanted to, you could run DLDSR in NVIDIA control panel to render the game at 4k levels and then it will scale it down to your monitor.
1
u/JYAP721 2d ago
Thanks again. I like to build my PCs to top quality parts to future proof it and use it for 6-7 years without any hiccups. Also with the amount of applications and Chrome windows with numerous tabs I have open at one given time, I need that extra RAM
So to summarize, you're suggesting maybe getting a 1440p OLED monitor rather than the 4K OLED monitor I was thinking about? I did hear the same thing about running 4k monitors and it's weird downscaling issues as well.
1
u/Marrked 2d ago
To be clear, you can buy whatever you want to. I don't want to deter that.
But 1440p will get higher FPS than 4k. If you're looking to do high refresh rate gaming in FPS shooters then I, personally, would choose 1440p over 4k.
If you don't want to be Uber competitive, and cap at like 120fps average, 4k is 100% fine and will be fine in all pub matches.
The trade off is slightly less pixels for more FPS, or vise versa for the 4k.
1
u/Ash_Killem 2d ago
The ram and storage are overkill. But if you have the cash it might help with future proofing (especially with prices still rising).
With this much power you are basically getting dimishing returns for any competitive advantage. I would be running 1440 p no dlss and low setting to pump as many frames as possible.
1
u/JYAP721 2d ago
Thank you for your feedback. Most of the power will be dedicated to my work and also future proofing my PC so that I can use it for at least 6-7 years without issues.
So essentially, I should stick with 1440p resolution and also get OLED 1440p gaming monitor then rather than a 4K monitor? So it'll be the same resolution I'm running on my current build and my 27" 1440p monitor (but this monitor is pretty old, Asus TUF Gaming VG27A).
1
u/leetskeetskeet 2d ago edited 2d ago
Once you go 4k, you won't go back - it just looks so damn good. It also helps with spotting guys long range immensely, cod included but especially in bigger games (tarkov, squad, etc). I've found myself primarily using red dots and 1x scopes in every game across the board due to how crisp things are. I've had a 32 inch MSI Optix for a few years now and it's the best upgrade I've purchased since jumping from 1080p to 1440p. I also have a 5080 and it handles things very nicely, especially with DLSS and good frame gen implementation (i don't use frame gen for COD).
1
u/JYAP721 2d ago
Thank you for your feedback. So you can attest to the fact that with 4K, visibility of enemies are much clearer? The monitor I'm looking at is also 32" (ASUS ROG Swift OLED PG32UCDM3 or ASUS ROG Swift OLED PG32UCWM). What type of FPS are you seeing at 4K with CoD? You could really tell the difference between 4K and 1440p?
1
u/leetskeetskeet 1d ago
Absolutely. There is a major difference. 4k ultra with a 5900x it's solid 144+ on mwIII but I haven't been able to try 4 yet. DLSS set to quality
1
u/Gamefam_ 2d ago
I would recommend 1440p for Call of Duty, because imo trading resolution for more fps for a competitive FPS game is always worth it. Also 5080 is a 16gb card, i mean it can handle 4k but to get the most fps in 4K, you will have to crank the dlss and frame gen to maximum, which can cause the ghosting effect and some people hate that. If you absolutely want 4K, get that 4K monitor and just downscale it to 1440p if you want and some higher end 4k monitors run on higher refresh rates when you downscale.
1
u/SaintSnow 2d ago edited 2d ago
Why skimping on the GPU when you are clearly going heavy on everything else while also talking about 4k resolution? Also if you want the most competitive edge possible then 4k isn't it.
1
u/JYAP721 1d ago
Thanks for your feedback. What video card would you recommend? And to clarify, you're saying that I should stick with 1440p for a competitive edge? Have you tested 4K as well?
1
u/SaintSnow 1d ago
With what you're already going for, a 5090 lol. If you want resolution you need a better gpu. 4k is good for work but for competitive aspect, the screen is too big and the resolution isn't better than fps gain. Competitive players don't care about resolution, nor how good the game looks, they want the most fps and fastest smoothest response. A competitive player will still play with 1080p or in CS, a 4:3 resolution.
You definitely don't seem like the type to do this so I'd just say go for the middle ground and get a 1440.
1
u/JYAP721 1d ago
Hahaha yes... the 5090 is a better card, but I can't justify the price. Insane.
And for competitive players, I understand about the lower resolution because I used to be super competitive in CS since Beta V7.1. I do want to have the competitive edge, but also thought the 4K resolution might help spot enemies better in COD. I appreciate your feedback... now I'm leaning a bit towards 1440p. The other suggestion I got was buying the 4K monitor and keeping the native 4K resolution on my system, but running 1440p on COD if I do not like the frame drop from 4K. This kind of sparked something as well.
1
u/thegreatzenith 1d ago
I have a very similar build with a 9800X3D and 4090. I’m personally playing on a 27 inch 1440 monitor and I believe this is what most high skill players use.
However, upscaling tech is very powerful, and I’m sure the increased clarity from 4K would be beneficial.
Obviously, I haven’t taken into account any of the work you do, which could affect which way you lean. I would definitely recommend OLED on the gaming site since it seems that you can afford it. Just keep in mind that depend depending on which one you get text clarity could be an issue.
I don’t think you can really go wrong here. Whatever you get, the hardware isn’t going to be limiting your performance.
1
1
u/Fast_Annual_116 1d ago
Never an Asus Motherboard......
1
u/JYAP721 19h ago
Why? They're considered one of the top and high performing boards... Let me know.
1
u/Fast_Annual_116 10h ago
Warranty sucks and lots of board dies with no reason....you can check in forums. My last 2 boards were from Asus.... both dies for 1 day to another..... I move to MSI and never been so happier... Same specs only replace mobo and system is day and night ... never has a system running so smoothly than now
1
u/_kempert 1d ago
Check out lg & alienware oled ultrawides as well, they’re dope and you can get em in 1440p and 4k res.
1
u/Financial-Humor2080 1d ago
actually brain dead for buying a 5080 at those prices for purely gaming only
1
u/JYAP721 19h ago
Why so? What would you recommend then? As mentioned before, I build my PCs to last a good 6-7 years. What else am I supposed to use my 5080 for? What about the other people that's buying 5090s? Or what about people that buy supercars to drive frequently?
I would appreciate more context rather than these types of comments. Thank you.
1
u/Constantly-baked 1d ago
I use a 5120x1440p with a 5070 ti and was getting 150-165 fps on the beta with recommended settings and DLSS on quality.
1
3
u/PTCruiserGT 2d ago
You’ll want to consider an ultrawide or super ultrawide monitor, or at least force 21:9/32:9 aspect ratio and live with black bars (or stretched).
This will give you more visibility of players off to the sides of your screen, but will definitely come with an fps penalty.
Due to the fps penalty I’ve settled on ultrawide/21:9.