Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

Super Rig for Recording gameplay @4k single display, or 5760x1080, and recording.

Level 8
My intention is to record gameplay @4k on a single monitor, or run games on triple 1920x1080 and video capture main screen and cam at the same time, and edit video using Adobe Premiere on a professional level.

Already Acquired Parts
Speakers - - Klipsch 2.1
Headset - - MadCatz F.R.E.Q. 9
Mouse - - MadCatz MMO TE <- RMA >:[
KB - - MadCatz STRIKE TE <- RMA >:[
Chair - - Herman Miller Fully Loaded Aeron

Chosen Parts
CPU - - Intel Core i7-5960X @ 3.00GHz Extreme Edition
RAM - - 4x 8GB Gskill Ripjaws4 DDR4 2400 F4-2400C15Q-32GRK
MBO - - Asus Rampage V Extreme/U3.1
GPU - - (2-stage build. One 4GB card first. 6-8GB SLI when they are sold)
PSU - - SeaSonic Platinum - 1200 (SS-1200XP3)
SSD - - Intel SSD 750 400GB for OS
SSD - - Intel SSD 750 400GB for Star Citizen
HDD - - Toshiba DT01ACA200 2TB (#1)
HDD - - Toshiba DT01ACA200 2TB (#2)
OS - - Microsoft Windows 8.1 Pro 64bit [OEM]
Case - - Caselabs Magnum M10
Display - - (2-stage build. One display first, then +2 of the same later)
Display stand - - Obutto Revolution Triple Monitor Mount
Liquid Cooler - -
Sound - - Integrated SupremeFX 2014
Audio capture - -
Video capture - -
Green Screen backdrop - -
Soundproofing - -

I haven't experienced 4k gaming myself except with the DSR factors setting in the NVidia control panel and I will say three gtx 680 4GB cards can't do it, FPS are too low.

If you want to future proof to an extent the titan x would be the way to go for 4k. There are some games now that use 6GB of vram at 4k and new games coming in the future will only use more. I'm with Korth, 2 titan x's minimum for 4k gaming to ensure 60FPS. Crysis 3 even drags 2 titan x's to its knees at 4k with FPS averaging in the 40's.

Now let's talk about monitors. I been looking for days at monitors and right now the biggest 4k monitor with g-sync is the acer 28" but is still a little small for gaming to me and has a TN panel. A TN panel has the fastest response times down to 1ms which is what we gamers desire but TN panels don't have the picture quality or color accuracy as an ips/pls display.

So the question is do you want a monitor with g-sync with a fast response time and slightly lower picture quality or do you want a bigger monitor with a better picture. I will sacrifice g-sync in a heartbeat for a bigger and better picture as long as the response time is reasonable.

The fastest non g-sync monitor I've come across is the Benq BL3201PH. It's a 32" 4k ips monitor with a response time of 4ms. And the price is better than most others out there at 979.99

Level 10
The best way to future proof for 4k would be to not buy Nvidia cards and wait for the R9 390x, tbh.

I have never understood why you would want G-Sync.


The sheer cost of the monitors makes it so that you have to have a high-end system to be have it be worth spending so much money on a display.

But if you have a high-end system, what will you need G-Sync for?

Best display I've found so far.
IPS is useless for gaming anyways, since colors are always oversaturated on purpose. In case you cha...
Say hi to the next generation.

Peace is a lie, there is only Passion

Through passion, I gain strength

Through strength, I gain victory

Through victory, my chains are broken

The Republic of Gamers shall free me