What to anticipate with my present setup and transitioning from a 2K display to 4K?
What to anticipate with my present setup and transitioning from a 2K display to 4K?
I just placed an order for a 32" Samsung Odyssey G8 G81SF. I've been relying on an Acer Predator 27" 2K 165Hz display for gaming. My current setup includes:
ROG Crosshair VIII Dark Hero motherboard
Ryzen 5900X
MSI 4090
32GB Gskill RAM @ 3600Mhz
Seasonic 850W PSU
360mm AIO cooler
Corsair 780T case
I've managed to play most games between 100 and 160 FPS. Even poorly optimized titles can hit 100+ FPS with DLSS. I recognize the 5900X is outdated, but it was a solid 12-core CPU back then. I'm not in a position to start a full rebuild just yet. The new monitor will be larger—5" and 4K instead of 2K—and it should put some strain on my system. I wonder if I can still keep at least 60 FPS at ultra settings with all the graphics effects enabled? I think I'll need to rely on DLSS and probably set it to balanced mode.
The review indicates the PSU is significantly underpowered for the RTX 4090. For such a GPU, a 1.2kW unit would be ideal, while a 1.6kW model is better. The GPU alone consumes around 450W, and with spikes up to 662W, it leaves little headroom for other components. The CPU usage is estimated at 380-400W during gaming. Adding the rest of the system's power draw between 100-150W, a 1.2kW PSU would barely cover the load, which is why a 1.6kW unit is recommended. If you begin gaming in 4K resolution, your PSU will struggle. The recommendation is to upgrade to a Seasonic model.
Hey, thanks for letting me know. I need to keep track of where I was looking at the watts while my GPU was drawing power. It seems my GPU isn't getting much heat during 2K gaming, which probably means it's not being used fully right now. I hadn't considered increasing the wattage to 4K yet. I recalled using Afterburner to monitor the watts after installing the 4090. Wow, high-wattage PSUs can be expensive!
When considering the price of your RTX 4090, a 1.6kW power supply is very affordable in comparison.
The platinum PSU is $100 less and can be delivered on the same day as the monitor. The titanium model takes two days longer to ship. The efficiency gap between the two is roughly 2% under varying loads. You’ve preferred titanium before, but the platinum remains a strong option.
I manage more than 80 Titanium units myself, including two Seasonic PRIME TX-650 models. Both of my PCs rely on UPSes, so improved PSU efficiency is essential for extended operation. For top-tier quality 1.6kW options, I recommend checking pcpp: https://pcpartpicker.com/products/compar...xr,vYP8TW/. Personally, I favor Seasonic, but Be Quiet!, AsRock and Super Flower are also reliable picks (Super Flower would be my second preference).
I chose the TX1600 and appreciated your pointing out the importance of a better PSU. I hadn't considered it before.
Now that my new monitor is installed, I'm wondering about a few things. I just entered the game I'm playing, Avowed. I haven't got my new PSU yet, so I'm still using the 850 W one. My FPS has fallen from around 120 to about 80. The CPU temperatures seem a bit lower now, at 58°C. The GPU temperature didn't rise much with the 4K monitor; it's running at a cool 39°C. Afterburner shows the maximum wattage is the same as with my 1440P monitor—170 W. It looks like the GPU isn't being used very intensely?
The Nvidia control panel is set to max performance. I checked all my game settings, and everything is in ultra mode with ray tracing on and DLSS at balanced.
I was hoping the GPU would be much more active in 4K. Still planning to install the 1600W PSU once it arrives.
Update: I'm a bit puzzled here. I set Afterburner to monitor both GPU and CPU usage. I reopened the game for a few minutes. The CPU usage in Afterburner is 84, and the GPU usage is 99. I’m assuming these are percentages. Is it even possible my 4090 is only running at 39°C with 99% usage? It’s an MSI Gaming X Trio.
Once I have the 1600W PSU installed, I’ll run the Superposition benchmark. I don’t want to risk it with the 850W one.
Update: I don’t understand how this happened. I was checking the graphs on the Afterburner interface and noticed my power limit was set all the way down to 33% on the left side. I adjusted it to 100%. When I went back into the game, FPS improved to 150. CPU temperature stayed at 58°C, and GPU temperature rose to 52°C. Both CPU and GPU usage remained unchanged. GPU power consumption is now 341 watts.
If I’m not mistaken, this looks really good and much better than expected.
I remember reading about lowering the power limit of the 4090 to keep temperatures down when I first installed it, but I think I might have set it to 85% or something similar. It’s odd that it was at 33%. I definitely didn’t set it that low on purpose.
GPU has the ability to take precedence over afterburner configurations when it doesn't agree with user adjustments. For optimal performance, expect output levels between 64C and 72C from your GPU. Review the source: https://www.techpowerup.com/review/msi-g...io/35.html. If not, a constraint such as power limits is preventing full utilization.
I've never come across information about the GPU overriding power limit settings, particularly in Afterburner. I was just looking at some discussions from 2022 and 2023 on other platforms about setting power limits to the minimum. How can the GPU independently override Afterburner's instructions? I only have MSI Center installed, and besides that, I've only added Mystic Light for RGB on the GPU.
When I close MSI Center, it doesn't open automatically after a restart.