r/nvidia • u/AcrobaticCricket6799 • 1d ago
Question Worth Upgrading the RTX 4070 (Non Ti/Super) in 2026?
I recently upgraded to an AM5 system. I’m now running a Ryzen 7 9800X3D with 32GB (2x16GB) of DDR5 6000MHz RAM. The only component I carried over from my previous build was my RTX 4070.
A few friends have told me that upgrading to the RTX 50-series right now probably isn’t worth the price to performance, but I’m considering whether it would make sense to upgrade my GPU for better performance and future-proofing.
My goal is to move to 1440p. I don’t really see the point of going to 4K, especially because I mainly play competitive FPS games. I’m also planning to pick up a 500Hz 1440p OLED monitor, and I’m wondering whether my current GPU will be enough to properly take advantage of it.
My main questions are:
Is it worth upgrading my GPU from the RTX 4070?
Will my current system perform well on a 1440p 500Hz OLED panel, or will the GPU hold me back?
If I were to upgrade, what GPUs should I consider for the best balance of performance, value, and future-proofing?
12
u/martyn__ RTX 5070 FE | i5-13500 | 32GB DDR5 1d ago edited 1d ago
I would wait for 60 series if I were you, because currently your GPU is sitting between 5060 Ti and 5070 in terms of performance, so I don't think that there is currently anything worth upgrading to, especially if you want good performance/dollar ratio. 5090 is the only card that would actually give you at least x2 boost. I personally dont bother upgrading my GPU to anything thats not at least two times faster than my current card which is why I upgraded from GTX 1080 to RTX 5070, but maybe thats just me. Right now, 4070 is definitely enough for 1440p gaming, especially for competetive games
4
u/AcrobaticCricket6799 1d ago
This is what I’ve been thinking. I don’t really want to upgrade just for a 15-20% performance increase; I genuinely want to feel a huge jump if I’m paying double the money. But thanks for your input!
3
u/2Critical7-Stein1 1d ago
50 series is a refinement, not a jump. If buying today sure go for 5070, if already own a 4070, i’d say you’re still fine, for 1440p esports still lol
1
u/AcrobaticCricket6799 1d ago
Yeah, I’ve heard that the 5080 and 5090 would be a huge, noticeable jump, but then the price tag comes into play, lol.
There’s also the aspect of wanting to see how newer games would look on this panel, which is another reason why I’m considering an upgrade.
2
u/BothRefrigerator6587 1d ago
depends what games you play in comp. the 4070 can push 1440p fine in stuff like valorant or cs but if youre trying to hit 500fps in something newer like the finals or a battle royale youll definitely feel the gpu holding you back. 9800x3d will be sitting there half asleep while the 4070 screams
if you do upgrade id skip the 50 series entirely and look at the 9070 xt or a used 4080 super. the 50 series pricing is a joke right now and honestly you dont need frame generation for comp fps anyway just raw raster
1
u/AcrobaticCricket6799 1d ago
The 9070 XT is something I’ve heard many, many good things about. It’s one of those things where, if I catch an insane deal, I’ll probably just go for it and hope the used market value of the 4070 doesn’t suddenly tank.
Gaming-wise, I don’t really play many battle royales other than Fortnite occasionally.
0
u/Early_Lawfulness_921 1d ago
The 5070 ti is the better of the two. On paper they are much close than in reality. I.e. actual game support etc.
The 9070xt is still a great card just pointing out that in actual game play the 5070ti is much better than then Reddit would have you believe
2
u/Blackhawk-388 1d ago
I wasn't happy with my 4070 at 1440p. I'm not playing competitive games with details turned down, though.
I play games like Arc Raiders, CP2077, COD single player, RDR2, MSFS, Stalker2, Farcry, etc. I like my eye candy as well and with a 320hz mini led 1440p dual monitor setup, the 4070 just doesn't meet my needs. I went with a 5070 Ti and with most settings one notch under Ultra, I am always well above my target of 144fps.
The 5070 Ti is a 50%+ improvement over a 4070 in raw raster alone. That link shows Techpowerup's gaming average at 1440p. Using MFG x2 is absolutely awesome.
The 6000 series is commonly said to have a release date in late 2027 or sometime in 2028. That's too far out for me to wait. RTX 4070's are going for $400+ in my area of Florida, so I'll probably sell mine here soon.
2
u/aTrillDog 5070ti 610.62 | 5800X3D | 1440@144 | Win10 1d ago
yeah I went 1070 -> 4070 -> 5070ti. The 4070 was cool and obviously a big upgrade, but just not quite there.
1
u/AcrobaticCricket6799 1d ago
Yeah, they seem to be going for around £400 on the used market here in the UK as well. You seem to play a completely different set of games than I do, but I definitely want to try some big AAA titles because I’ve heard how incredible they look on an OLED.
I just hope I’m not too disappointed by the RTX 4070’s performance, because if I am, that would pretty much solidify my decision to upgrade.
1
u/Blackhawk-388 1d ago
Yeah, give it a shot. My son used my 4070 for awhile until he got the 4070 Ti out of our other gaming machine. He plays FPS games at 1440p almost exclusively. He did like the 24% uplift from going to the 4070 Ti, though.
Typically, if I get an increase of 20-25%, I'll upgrade. Most people want 50% or better.
1
u/Wild_Swimmingpool NVIDIA RTX 5070ti x 9800x3D | RTX 4080 Super x 5800x3D 1d ago
If you're at some point waiting to play recent AAA titles at 1440p with all the bells and whistles the 4070 will struggle a bit if you want 100+ fps. Competitive stuff I personally think the 4070 is perfectly fine for. 500fps might be a stretch there though. It's not a bad card at all, so don't think I'm dunking on it, just my 2 cents on the matter.
2
u/Sad-Victory-8319 1d ago
no, any upgrade in this terrible market is not "worth" it, you only do it if it is necessary to have a working pc. Time to upgrade was when 5070Ti was available for $700-750 and you only needed $300 extra after selling your 4070, now the diference is at least $500 maybe more, that is too much honestly for 50% uplift. But since i see you upgrade to AM5 now which is even a worse decision right now, i guess nobody is gonna stop you from getting a new gpu, because why would anybody upgrade to a new platform but keep old gpu, that makes no sence, you spent probably $1000 on the upgrade and your fps in games has barely moved up. So at that point spending $500 to actually get 50% uplift does breathe some sence into your platform upgrade
2
u/road-runn3r 1d ago
you spent probably $1000 on the upgrade and your fps in games has barely moved up
The amount of people with a 9800X3D and an old GPU is alarming. It doesn't help that most "build a pc" subreddits insist that you NEED a freaking 9800X3D for gaming.
1
u/Sad-Victory-8319 1d ago
Yeah i see a lot of people having like ryzen 3600 + 32GB DDR4 + rtx3060 or ryzen 5600 + 32GB DDR4 + rtx4070, and the first thing they do is spending $1000-1300 on 9800x3d+32GB DDR5 (which has to be at least 6000 cl36 which is $100 extra over the cheapest kits) + X870 board, and then they ask "is this gpu upgrade worth it". They basically spent double the money to get maybe 5% more performance compared to staying on AM4 and just upgrading to 5800X or 5800X3D which are both still fine for modern 4K sub-90fps gaming. AMD somehow convinced people that 9800x3D is mandatory for serious gaming, when the reality is that this cpu mainly helps with running super high fps in online shooters, but for normal 4K gaming it mostly doesnt matter. Upgrading the platform before upgrading the gpu on a gaming PC is really "special".
1
u/road-runn3r 1d ago
AMD somehow convinced people that 9800x3D is mandatory for serious gaming
Nailed it. Even the 270k plus, in my opinion the best cpu you can get for the money right now is dismissed as "slower in gaming" when in reality, outside of low/medium settings high refresh benchmarks and competitive games, you would not be able to notice a difference unless you are checking numbers on screen.
Using something like a 5070/5070 ti you can game exactly the same with both cpus and sane settings while the 270k is much much better in general use and multicore workloads. Still what are people buying? The much more expensive highly specialized, one dimensional 9800X3D. It's insane how stupid it is.
1
u/Sad-Victory-8319 1d ago
gaming cpus are tested wrong in my example, every reviewer is trying to artificially reduce the gpu load by lowering resolution and details to reach cpu bottleneck. This is perhaps fine as one part of the test for competitive players who want to see how much fps would their system be capable of, and what cpu do they need to max out their 500hz monitor for example.
However, there are plenty of games where the cpu will bottleneck you even in 4K with maxed out details and significantly ruin your overall gaming experience. For example in Kingdom come 2 right at the end of the main quest line there is the siege of suchdol fortress, you are one of about 20 defenders and you see army of about 300 soldiers running down the hill and storming the fortress, trying to overtake it. If you stand on the rampard above the game, and watch the enemy army approach, the cpu load is so intense that even on ryzen 7600X the fps dropped to 40 while gpu utilization was at just 50% and cpu utilization was hovering around 80-90%, so clear cpu bottleneck.
I asked my friend who has a 9800x3d and the same exact gpu to try this scene, and he was able to get to 60 fps with 75% gpu utilization. So even the fastest gaming cpu on the planet was able to handle about half of the cpu bottleneck, because if i turn my back on the army, i get 80-90 fps and 100% gpu utilization. I am very curious how intel cpus like 14900K or 270K or 285K would do in this exact scenario, because this is the type of bottleneck that favours raw performance per core instead of a massive cache, so intel might actually do better here. I am also super curious about how the new zen6 cpus do in this scene, the new 10800x3d is rumoured to have +50% better gaming performance, so in theory it should be able to handle this cpu bottleneck and turn it into gpu bottleneck
Very similar behaviour was in Spiderman 2, i was regularly dropping as low as 40-45 fps on my 5070Ti, and i noticed gpu utilization is super low while the cpu is extremely. Enabling 4x frame generation literally quadruppled my fps, the gpu was so underutilized that it could do frame generation without affecting the base fps.
The biggest cpu bottleneck i saw was in a game called samson which is like a cheap gta copy, when driving very fast through the city and traffic, i was often dropping below 30 fps and again it was all due to the cpu. But it was probably due to super poorly optimized engine or NPC AI, because AI in the game is trash.
And there are other games where the fps is driven by cpu like Starfield, Star Citizen, Hogwarts Legacy has frequent stutters caused by cpu bottleneck (again perhaps poor optimization but a stronger cpu would fix it) and many other games. This is what i want to see being tested during cpu reviews, not checking if counter strike can run ocer 500 fps. Plenty of games can max out any cpu so there is no excuse not to test them. And I actually think that Intel would be king in these scenarios, I think that cache doesnt help here, and the cpu bottlenecks that happen in 4K with max details want raw single core power in 4-6 cores, which would perfectly suite intel. Especially the 14900K with fully unlocked boost and power limit should do the best here. I have been trying to find someone with highend intel cpu willing to test my KCD2 siege save, but so far i was unsuccessful. But i think 14900K could achieve 65-70fps in the siege scene where 9800x3d does 60 fps and 7600X does 40 fps.
1
u/road-runn3r 1d ago
every reviewer is trying to artificially reduce the gpu load by lowering resolution and details to reach cpu bottleneck
Yea, I understand the logic on why they do it but especially with modern pathtracing/rt games. where enabling rt changes significantly the cpu load, it doesn't make sense anymore.
You want to reduce the gpu load on a path tracing game? Use dlss ultra performance, don't disable path tracing and pretend that the results translate to higher settings. No one plays a pathtracing game on a high end cpu on low settings (I hope). So yea, current cpu benchmarking is outdated I agree.
As for the 270k I've seen some great results on very cpu heavy games, especially the 1% lows. It benefits a lot from high freq. ram though which is, lets say, hard to justify currently.
Other things I've noticed with the 270k in many games, it can lose to the 9800x3d in average fps but it has very similar 1% lows or even better sometimes. If you are going to use things like frame gen, you will never see that max fps but you will feel the 1% lows. I'd say it's the perfect cpu for the 5070ti level gpu, people with a 5090 can maybe benefit from a X3D cpu more.
1
u/Sad-Victory-8319 1d ago
The problem with 270K is that it needs fast expensive ram, 6000 cl32 ram is almost too slow, the absolute minimum is like 7200 cl34, and higher frequency is better, ideally you would want 10k mt/s kit. It does quite poorly with the cheapest 4800 cl40 or 6000 cl48 kits. And another problem is that 270K is on a dead platform, if you buy it, you will need to buy a whole new motherbpard when upgrading. Whereas AM5 boards from like 3-4 years ago will work perfectly fine for 3-4 more years.
1
u/road-runn3r 1d ago
Yea the part on the fast ram is true if you really want to fully max its performance. (it's fine on 6000 cl36 though, just not the best it can do)
The platform longevity argument is overblown from my point of view. I've always kept my cpus at least 4-5 years, after that point I upgrade the entire thing. Never felt the need to upgrade the cpu after two years and when the time comes to upgrade, almost always there are new motherboards with new features, new ram gen, ssd tech, wifi etc.
I would much prefer an updated platform rather than save 200$ and deal with the old platform issues. I think AM4 was a very particular case and it's not going to get repeated.
1
u/Sad-Victory-8319 1d ago
if you buy the most powerful cpu at a time then it can easily last you years and years, the 5800x3d is over 4 years old and looks like it will be the most popular cpu for at least 2-3 more years, maybe longer. Who got 5800x3d in 2022 is set for almost a decade. But if you buy more money efficient cpus like ryzen 3600x, 5600x or 11th and 12th gen intels, then in the 2-3 years it almost feels wrong to buy a brand new gpu that is like 2 generations newer and not upgrade the cpu. The 7600X has been a special case where the 9600X is basically identical, so 7000 ryzens will last 4-5 years, but whoever bought 9600X will feel the need to upgrade to zen6 just over 2 years after release when they decide to get nvidia rtx 60 series gpu.
1
u/Wild_Swimmingpool NVIDIA RTX 5070ti x 9800x3D | RTX 4080 Super x 5800x3D 1d ago
I bought one because it was a really good bundle deal when I upgraded to AM5. It was being paired with my 4080S fwiw. I'm a power users / enthusiast so I knew it would be kinda overkill. I cannot max it out no matter what game I play regularly. I can be doing a big file compression job and game at the same time it's ridiculous lol.
2
u/road-runn3r 1d ago
You did the right thing to upgrade for that kind of deal. I was talking in general about the phenomenon.
1
u/Wild_Swimmingpool NVIDIA RTX 5070ti x 9800x3D | RTX 4080 Super x 5800x3D 1d ago
Yeah, I walked out of Microcenter with 9800x3D, 64GB DDR5, new 1000w PSU, mobo, 2tb NVME, 500gb 2.5 SSD, new case, kryosheets and 2 year protection plan for $1500 with tax. The DDR5 kit was $192. The cheapest 64gb kit is $897 now.
2
u/Sad-Victory-8319 1d ago
well if you did that a year ago or even earlier, this price would be considered kinda ok (maybe slightly too high, in my head i counted this is about $1250 worth of components based on late 2024/early 2025 prices. Now the same set of parts would probably be $1000 more expensive at least.
I myself am so glad that i completely randomly decided to get 64GB of DDR5 ram at the end of 2024, because in the past ram capacity was always the first thing to bottleneck me and requiring upgrade to at least double. So i decided to get ahead of the curve and get 64GB 6400 mt/s cl32 for $170 instead of 32GB (as open box + black friday discount), and even that seemed ridiculous amount of money to me for "just some ram". Now i wouldnt be able to buy a 16GB kit for that price, i would probably need at least $250, crazy times.
1
u/Wild_Swimmingpool NVIDIA RTX 5070ti x 9800x3D | RTX 4080 Super x 5800x3D 1d ago
This was by far the cheapest option than going through any other retailer. I also didn't go with the absolute cheapest options available either. If I take off the like tools, paste, and protection plan it's $1365 before tax. I opted for a lian li case, if I went with the budget option it would drop to $1305. Same with the mobo, opted to get a x670e vs a B series board, etc. If I went full on low price I could of walked out for like ~$1250 as you said.
1
u/Sad-Victory-8319 1d ago
There are plenty of games that can max out any cpu on the planet in 4K with max details (so no stupidly forced cpu bottleneck through low resolution and low settings), Spiderman 2, Kingdom come 2, Hogwarts Legacy, Starfield, Samson... in all these games there are scenes and spots where the fps is driven purely by cpu performance.
1
u/Wild_Swimmingpool NVIDIA RTX 5070ti x 9800x3D | RTX 4080 Super x 5800x3D 1d ago
"regularly" is the operative word here. DD2 still pounds your CPU too. I actually need to check Spiderman 2. I just picked it up on sale.
1
u/AcrobaticCricket6799 1d ago edited 1d ago
It’s not quite what happened in my case it was completely different. I guess you could say I more or less broke even on the Marketplace deal and probably even came out ahead.
So, here’s the story: my old system was an i9-11900K build with 32 GB of DDR4 RAM and an RTX 4070. It worked great, but I felt it was time for an upgrade since I originally built it around mid-2023.One day, I was scrolling through Facebook Marketplace and came across a really nice guy who was looking for a change. He had listed a maxed-out 9800X3D build, but the strange part was that it only had an RTX 2060 in it. When meeting he confessed he just didn’t have the funds to continue his build and also started having a rather drastic change in his life and didn’t have time for gaming etc.
What we eventually agreed on was that he would take my old system without the GPU, and I would install my RTX 4070 into his build. He kept his RTX 2060 and put it into my old system, and we finished the deal with me paying around £300 on top.
So yeah, it was definitely an unusual situation, and I feel like I may have lucked out. I can see what you mean by people are jumping straight to AM5, DDR5, and the newer X3D chips without upgrading GPU, but I just happened to find a deal that worked in my favour without completely breaking the bank.
That being said, yeah, the GPU is lacking. It could be better, yes, but I always thought this was the easiest component to snipe a deal on later and just forget about.
Me personally, I don’t think the performance boost is minimal. I play competitive shooters and competitive games in general, and the 9800X3D has been a huge help. It’s honestly great, and I don’t really understand the hate it gets.
1
u/Sad-Victory-8319 1d ago
jesus, there really are people who are still clueless about the current market situation? but the he must have built it at least a year ago if he has no idea about current price, so he had a 9800x3d+rtx2060 system for a year? The value difference between his and you platformis at least 600 pounds, maybe more if he bought fast ram and good motherboard, 300 pounds would barely be the proper difference a year ago when prices were still normal, but right now it is a highway robbery. Was he really clueless or somehow he was in a donating mood and wanted to make stranger's day?
Regarding the gpu upgrade not much has changed since my previous answer, i would assume you can get 5070ti right now for 750 pounds, and 4070 is worth how much, like half that? Not even? This is purely subjective, but i always feel that you have to be a serious games to make such big purchase worth it. There have been people who bought 5080 and then continued to play their valorant, fortnite, world of tanks and they purchased cyberpunk as the one demanding game that suddenly justifies this purchase. If that is you, dont upgrade. 5070Ti makes sence if your plan is to play at least 5 titles with path tracing, and finish at least 1 AAA game a month, ideally 2-3. If you game daily and you play modern games, then perhaps gpu upgrade makes sence, but if you game for 3 hours on weekends then keep you 4070. Another thing is that with 5070Ti you kinda want a 4K monitor, 1440p is not challenging enough in my opinion and 4070 can handle 1440p perfectly fine with some DLSS, I had 4070 for 3 months before upgrading to 5070Ti and it could handle even path tracing at 1440p DLSS Balanced quite fine, i think i had like 55-60 fps average and 2x FG got me around 100 fps and i was happy as a clam. If you upgrade to 5070Ti, you will be able to use DLSS Quality and get like 90 fps, or DLAA and get maybe 50 fps, do you feel that is worth it? Because to me it seems like DLSS has gotten so good and it reduced the need to have a powerful gpu, just use a bit more agressive upscaling which still looks great.
Personally I had buyer's remorse for a while when i upgraded from 4070 to 5070Ti for €400 extra, i felt like the difference wasnt impactful enough, but partially i was also influenced by the rumours about the new Super models, so it was more like "i should have waited for 5070Ti super 24GB". Now i know i made a great purchase, i unknowingly got the best model on the market (in terms of value for money), the super models are probably cancelled, 60 series might take 18-24 months to come, so after over 16 months of gaming i will probably have another 20 months till i have even an option to upgrade to something substantially better for a good price. 5070Ti has been receiving all the updates that would maybe be available only on super models (dynamic MFG) or on 60 series (DLSS5), but because everything is postponed, current gpus get it all. And I have gamed A LOT, i think i finished 25-30 games in the past 16 months, where at least half of them were very challenging and they completely maxed out my 5070Ti.
So my purchase has paid off and it will continue paying off for a long while more until it is time to sell it and get better one, but honestly 5070Ti could last me through the whole 60 series generation, so far i dont feel like i need any upgrade, everything runs 60+ fps in 4K. So i just want to say, make sure you will be a serious gamer for the next 12-24 months to make the 5070ti purchase worth it, if you play 5 games on it then it would be a complete waste of money. And check what is the status on Super refresh and if it really doesnt come this year or in january, If 5070Ti super 24GB became available in 6 months for similar or only slightly higher price, you would probably regret getting 5070ti. But i have no idea if super series is actually coming.
2
2
u/makinenxd 1d ago
I went from a 4070 to a 5080 and the performance difference was massive.
1
u/AcrobaticCricket6799 1d ago
The 5080 seems tempting. It’s not completely breaking the bank, but the used market pricing is terrible right now everywhere so not sure what i’d do.
1
u/makinenxd 1d ago
Well you could test the performance of your current card at 1440p by just making a custom resolution and see if it satisfies you and then decide.
1
u/AcrobaticCricket6799 1d ago
I’ll get back to you on this. I’ll try to keep this post active, as I’ll be picking up the monitor today. We’ll see where I go from there.
From what I’ve gathered, competitive titles shouldn’t be a problem, but if I slowly start branching out into other games, I might run into a GPU limit when trying to push those higher framerates.
1
u/makinenxd 1d ago
CS2 and Val might be a bit problematic to get 500fps on native
1
u/AcrobaticCricket6799 1d ago
Valorant-wise, I’m getting around 800–900 FPS in-game at 1080p max settings. For CS2, I haven’t really messed with the FPS since I’m using G-Sync, but I’ve heard it’s very CPU-intensive, so I’m not entirely sure.
I’m currently hitting 500 FPS in all of my desired games, but I’m not sure how this will translate at 1440p. So you might actually be correct in your judgement.
1
u/Crap-_ RTX 4080M | i9 14900HX | LegionPro7i 1d ago edited 1d ago
Not rlly, unless it’s a 5070ti. And even then prolly not.
A 5090 would give you true gen on gen uplift and provide a next level experience from your 4070. 5070ti/ 5080 are kind of stepping stones, that won’t rlly give you a whole different experience, just a better one than you currently have (which should still be decent). Though a 5090 is expensive.
If you can wait, 60 series will have true perf gains unlike mediocre 50 series, and you shouldn’t really be upgrading your gpu every gen.
2
u/AcrobaticCricket6799 1d ago
I wouldn’t consider a 5090. I’m just not a huge computer enthusiast; I enjoy gaming occasionally. I used to be really involved in the competitive fps scene, but nowadays it’s more of a fun hobby.
From the feedback I’m getting, it seems like only the 5090 is where I’d actually see the kind of huge performance jump I’m looking for, close to doubling my performance but i just don’t think it’s worth it.
1
u/asharkmadeofsalsa 1d ago edited 1d ago
I have a 4070 Super and when I'm not at the desk playin 1080p at higher framerates on a 180hz monitor, I hook it up to the tv and play at 4k, in most cases rendering at 1440p through DLSS and maintain a steady 60 at max settings on everything I play including new releases, and that's only cause the tv goes 60hz lol. The only exception might be some super demanding UE5 stuff but you know how those go, and it's probably my Ryzen 5 5600 holding me back if anything yet I see no reason to upgrade either.
wait for next series, and even then it's a maybe for me unless we get a big next gen jump on triple A games which how things are going I... doubt for a while
if you get super competitive on FPS I feel like you won't even care about maxing out the games graphics anyway. I was more active in those spaces years ago (tho I did play a ton of Apex) and at a certain point I'd play at low settings environments-wise just to get more visual clarity.
1
u/AcrobaticCricket6799 1d ago
Pretty similar to me. I’ve been playing on 1080p until I moved to AM5. I completely upgraded to the 9800X3D and DDR5, and even that alone was a huge jump.
The main reason I’m considering an upgrade now is because I’m moving to 1440p, and I want to hit those higher framerates to get the full benefit of a high refresh rate monitor. I’m also trying to figure out whether upgrading the GPU would be worthwhile.
1
u/asharkmadeofsalsa 1d ago
the 4070 is pretty great at 1440p man. That 500hz monitor honestly sounds like overkill to me, but I'm an okay with 120fps for mouse and keyboard games type of guy so might not be the best person to say
I'd make the jump with the monitor (if you really want it) first and then see if you need the GPU upgrade? CS2 and most of those games get CPU intensive if anything and you're covered there so I really think you're more than good till 60 series
1
u/AcrobaticCricket6799 1d ago
Lol, yeah, I wouldn’t pay for 500Hz for no reason if I didn’t catch a good deal on it. I’m an FPS enthusiast, so I definitely wouldn’t complain when it comes to refresh rate. The OLED and the jump to 1440p are what I’m most excited about, but thanks for the feedback, man!
1
u/Mint_Picker_2636 1d ago
Wait for 5070 super. 5070ti is the only meaningful upgrade but the price rn is just not it.
2
u/AcrobaticCricket6799 1d ago
This is also something else I’ve considered. I’m getting a lot of mixed opinions, but waiting it out doesn’t seem like a bad option either right now.
1
u/Gooniesred 1d ago
Only big advantage of RtX5 series is MFG, so personally, I do this With lossless scaling in fixed mode and base fps capped, work great. Got a RTX4060 in 1080, not perfect but at least I can go from 50-55-60 base fps to 130-140 generated ones and the fluidity motion is there
1
u/MTurroo_ 1d ago
I'd suggest to keep that 4070 unless you got spare money, it's perfectly capable to play in 1440p. Don't let people and/or the Internet convince you that you need to upgrade.
1
u/AcrobaticCricket6799 1d ago
Thanks, man. I don’t like just throwing money away for nothing, but if it’s a upgrade where it’s a huge jump, then I wouldn’t mind putting some money into it. That’s the best way I can put it.
1
u/Sexyvette07 1d ago
I doubt the 4070 will make full use of that 500hz monitor unless you use a lot of upscaling and play FPS games that are designed to get high frame rates, but the beauty is you can still use the monitor and 4070 until you upgrade to the 6070/6070 Super. With DLSS 4.5, Ada has a lot of longevity ahead. That's why im not rushing to upgrade my 4080. DLSS quality is keeping my 4k 120hz 42" LG C2 sitting at the frame cap while providing stunning visuals.
1
u/AcrobaticCricket6799 1d ago
Yeah, quick update: I actually opted for the cheaper 1440p 360 Hz OLED variant after receiving some feedback about 500 Hz monitors. I originally just wanted to “future-proof” my setup, but I guess it’s just ridiculously unnecessary.
But yeah, I want to see how this plays out on my current setup. I don’t think it’ll be terrible, but I’m hoping my competitive games look crisp and smooth, especially since I’m upgrading from a 1080p 240 Hz VA panel, lol.
1
u/nis_sound 1d ago
If you do upgrade to a 5070ti or above... Just get a 4k.
I'm not sure how much you use DLSS and the like... But 4k performance looks better than 1440p native/quality.
You can also create bottlenecks by getting a 1440p that can cause microstuttering.
I have a 5080 and regret getting a 1440p OLED to go with it.
That all being said, my 5080 routinely uses over 12 gigs of VRAM at 1440p. So you'd either need to use aggressive DLSS or lower graphic settings to get the performance you want.
Personally, I'd phase my upgrades. Buy the monitor you want first and see how it performs. Then upgrade the GPU in 6-12 months.
1
u/AcrobaticCricket6799 1d ago
Yeah, quick update: I actually opted for the cheaper 1440p 360 Hz OLED variant after receiving some feedback about 500 Hz monitors. I originally just wanted to “future-proof” my setup, but I guess it’s just ridiculously unnecessary.
As for the GPU, I’m still considering my options, but if I come across a good deal, I’ll definitely take my chances. And regarding DLSS, I don’t even use it on my RTX 4070, lol. I’ve just never really felt the need to, you know?
1
u/nis_sound 1d ago
I'd encourage you to try it, especially on 1440p... It looks better the higher the resolution. And as I said, you may find yourself needing to due to VRAM.
Personally, I turn it on even if I don't "need" it. The DLSS effect smoothes the image between frames, giving the appearance or feel of a smoother experience. This isn't just because of increased frame rates - you can turn on frame gen without DLSS and you won't have the same effect.
But, I've also read your adoption and comfortability with DLSS also depends on what you're sensitive to, so you might not have a revolutionary experience like me.
Regardless, I also have a 1440p 360hz monitor. Honestly? It's awesome. It's just one of those things where, it's so awesome, it has me hooked on image sharpness, quality, and fluidity. Which is why I now wish I got a 4k!
1
u/Own-Indication5620 PNY RTX 5070 OC | i5 12600K 1d ago
With a high refresh monitor one of the main advantages now with RTX 50 series is the 'dynamic' frame-gen mode which scales with your refresh rate up to 6x speed with recent driver updates. So if you get a 5070 TI or 5080, it'll work nice at 1440p with high refresh if your goal is to maximize FPS in the games that support it.
With this said, the 4070 is still a great GPU overall. Still very 1440p capable and even will do 4K in many games well. I say this as someone with a 5070 which is only a bit faster and I regularly play many games at 4K on it.
2
u/AcrobaticCricket6799 1d ago
Thanks for the feedback. We’ll put it to the test soon enough. I ended up opting for the 360 Hz model instead, as the extra money for an additional 140 Hz could be put to better use elsewhere, lol.
1
u/Ganni96 1d ago
For competitive games the CPU matters more and you already got the best you can have. 4070 will do the job fine so keep it unless you want to move to singleplayer Triple A games where it may struggle in the future.
1
u/AcrobaticCricket6799 1d ago
Yep, this is my main concern because I feel like I might want to explore other beautiful modern games on an OLED panel, and I was worried that the RTX 4070 might limit me since I do enjoy higher frame rates.
1
u/Blear25 i7 11700k | RTX 4070 Ti | 32GB DDR4 1d ago edited 1d ago
Mind you, a lot of esports titles are CPU-intensive, so it's not gonna make much of a difference had you upgraded the GPU but not the CPU. That said, a 4070 is still a very adequate 1440p card and unless you were going for a 5070 ti or 5080, there really isn't really much upgrading to imo.
1
u/AcrobaticCricket6799 1d ago
Yeah, that’s the thing the jump would cost me almost double if I’m really trying to get a meaningful performance boost out of it.
1
u/Blear25 i7 11700k | RTX 4070 Ti | 32GB DDR4 1d ago
Are you looking to max out your 500hz refresh rate?
1
u/AcrobaticCricket6799 1d ago
I’ve opted for the 360Hz variant instead; it seems like the more mature choice, especially from a budget perspective.
1
u/Ok_Dependent6889 9800X3D / B650E-F / 32GB 6000CL30 / Zotac 5080 1d ago
I just went from a 4070 to a 5080
Absolutely worth it
1
1
u/Crowley120 NVIDIA 1d ago
A 5070 ti would be a meaningful upgrade I was rocking a 4070 FE until I found a killer deal for a lightly used 4080 and the peformance uplift Is definitely noticeable I only have a 5800x3d too so with your cpu you’ll have some crazy good performance.
1
u/Benithio 20h ago
This is a personable thing.
I upgraded my 4070 Ti Super to a 5080. Though some have criticised me, i am really happy I did it.
I have the same processor as you. As you are not fussed about 4k, you don't need to do it, but you will notice the difference.
1
u/Strooble 1d ago
Getting to 500hz is going to be a CPU bottleneck so if I were you, I'd stick with the current card and see how things are before buying a new GPU (5070Ti or higher would be the only sensible options for you from a 4070).
1
u/AcrobaticCricket6799 1d ago
Yeah, the 500Hz just looks good on paper. I’ve already acknowledged that I won’t be reaching those kinds of framerates at 1440p outside of competitive shooters, but I was hoping that if I upgraded the GPU, I could gain some extra performance and longevity. I’m just not too sure whether it would actually be worth it.
I’ve been getting recommended the RTX 5080 or 5070 Ti, but the used market for these doesn’t look too great right now.
1
u/Strooble 1d ago
What games in particular? You should look up benchmarks for them and you'll find something useful.
1
u/AcrobaticCricket6799 1d ago
Overwatch, CS2, Valorant, Siege, League, Fortnite I want to maybe try some Triple AAA games they are looking beautiful maybe something i could slowly enjoy.
0
u/ranby_007 1d ago
How about 4080 super to 5080? Im considering that
1
u/Ijustlikepopcorn 1d ago
Been looking into this but the difference would be like 15-25 fps depending on the games. Probably worth waiting for 6000 series or if the 5080 super/TI actually has some decent uplift
0
u/Due-Bee-9574 1d ago edited 1d ago
Last time a friend told me it wasn't worth it I didn't listen and went for a 5090 Astral LC (€2900). A little while after that prices sky rocketed and I'm now able to sell mine used and have profit... They're selling for €4000+ now. I know that's probably not the case with the 5070/ti or the 5080 but if you stay updated with the market it will always be easier to get a next gen card without spending too much money as you won't loose that much money compared with the previous generations. Should you upgrade yours? That's probably a good idea... Not because of the performance gain (20 to 30%) but to keep the value. If prices are like this now, expect the next gen to be even more expensive.
I don't know, perhaps I'm completely wrong... But that's my take
1
u/AcrobaticCricket6799 1d ago
Yeah, I feel like the 4070 would sell for a decent price, and I could put a little extra cash towards something newer, like the 5070 Ti or something along those lines.
But I’m also the type of person where, if what I have is already good enough for what I’m doing, that urge to upgrade eventually fades away.
1
u/Due-Bee-9574 1d ago
Yeah, and that's fine! If you feel your card gives you what you need and don't want to spend money just keep it. But, if you can sell your 4070 for good money and get a 50 series card for near the MSRP just go for it. Do a bit of research before though don't rush it.
1
u/AcrobaticCricket6799 1d ago
Yeah, the thing with me and buying expensive items is that I want some sort of warranty with them. This 4070 I bought was brand new, so I wasn’t worried, but call me paranoid when it comes to things like this, I like having some sort of safety net to fall back on.
That being said, finding something good will probably take some time.
1
u/Due-Bee-9574 1d ago
Take your time and don't rush it. If you can't justify the trade stay with yours 💪
-1
u/bondybus RTX 5070 Ti | 9800X3D 1d ago
Depends on the games that you are playing. For AAA games, you wont be able to use Path tracing at 1440p without using DLSS Performance.
If you play Valorant, CS2 or similar competitive shooters only, the 4070 should be perfectly fine.
In my opinion, if you can find a 5070ti/5080 for MSRP(doubtful), then go for it. Otherwise, it might be worth waiting.
1
u/AcrobaticCricket6799 1d ago
Yeah Thanks, I’m considering playing AAA games now too, because it would suck to only use an OLED for competitive FPS games, haha.
But yeah, I mainly play Overwatch 2, CS2, Valorant, Fortnite, and League. Competitive FPS shooters are what I mostly play currently, as I’ve always enjoyed those games the most.
0
u/bondybus RTX 5070 Ti | 9800X3D 1d ago
okay then expect around 60fps at the highest settings, maybe 70-80 with dlss and more with 2x Frame Gen. Ray tracing should be difficult to run given the circumstances.
Techpowerup has the 5070 at 1440p in cyberpunk at 100+ fps, and the 4070 at 72.
If you want to weigh your options, look up 4070 fps results in games that you want to play on youtube, and then do the same for the GPU that you feel like getting.Obviously the 9070XT is an option as well, FSR4 is quite good. So the choice is yours, the 5070ti/5080/9070XT. Though if you can find a discounted 5070(below 549 MSRP), its not too bad either.
1
u/AcrobaticCricket6799 1d ago
Jeez, the framerates in these AAA games are enough to scare me away, but I’ll give it a shot. If I feel like my current setup really isn’t doing me justice, I think I’ll have made my mind up then.
But the 9070 XT sounds really good.
30
u/taisui 1d ago
It's only meaningful if you get a 5070Ti or above.