with common sense settings even my dinky card can run any game at 4k. many games could even do 60 fps even without all low settings.
Last edited:
with common sense settings even my dinky card can run any game at 4k. many games could even do 60 fps even without all low settings.
um that's got nothing to do what what i was saying. I was talking about that it will not be anywhere near 10 years before we can have gpus that can run 4k just fine.Which is pointless. Why would you run medium @ 4k when you can run Ultra at 1440p and the game looks much better? That's what many are talking about.
I have NOT seen this, but the quality of this display compared to other displays is just sad. It's not that great of a display. Not all monitors are made equally (I saw this in a review for the 55 inch model?).
Also, 4K content is just lacking and the frame rates are barely playable.
I don't think OP is saying 4K tests are bad, it's just they shouldn't be the ONLY thing released. It gets ridiculous when companies "Leak" their 4K benchmarks as the only thing (AMD...). "Leak" something else lol.
------------------
I have to agree on the OLED comment even more. LED is great man, but really, I need better blacks, and brighter whites. Just better CONTRAST ratio/display quality. OLED delivers that. 4K isn't as interesting as an even 1080p OLED display. With Bright blacks and dull whites, even if you had 8K running at 60FPS, a washed out image just won't cut it.
10 years away? Over exaggerating much? I'd say 2 years if we're LUCKY, 3 years standard, 4 years if we're pushing it.
With how fast 4K displays have been moving towards affordability I won't be too surprised if we see 2.5K USD 70 inch 4K tvs by 2015 Christmas Season.
Currently we're at 3.5K USD for a 55 inch Sony 4K HDTV.
um that's got nothing to do what what i was saying. I was talking about that it will not be anywhere near 10 years before we can have gpus that can run 4k just fine.
NO its not what I am talking about. if you cant figure it from what I just told you then i don't know what else to say.It is what you're talking about. Go 4k but only run medium settings (settings below console quality many times) cause you can't get playable framerates otherwise. I'm asking what the point is?
I doubt anyone in their right mind would choose 4k @ medium over 1440p @ Ultra in games with the same system given the choice. This doesn't account for any benefits of 4k on the desktop environment.
NO its not what I am talking about. if you cant figure it from what I just told you then i don't know what else to say.
I just told you it was in response to acting like it would take 10 years for gpus to be to play at 4k at high frame rates. if my dinky gpu can already play every game out there most of which on medium or better settings then of course it will not take 10 years for top of the line gpus to play at 4k good enough.You said "common sense settings" and "without all low settings" that says to me "Run below ultra and you can run 4k on low end hardware".
So if you're not willing to explain how I'm wrong and just want to claim it's not what you said when I quoted it, there's no point responding anymore.
I've used 120hz 1080p and my 60hz 1440p and I'll take the higher resolution any day. I haven't seen 4k in person but I'd imagine I'd pick the higher resolution over 120hz 1440p.
diminishing returns
1080p is a horrible resolution for a 27" monitor, 2560x1440p is fantastic. The oversized and VISIBLE pixels melt away on the screen at your desk. The retina display mac has even higher resolution and pixel density, but those stats are MEANINGLESS compared to the size advantage of the 27" panel for a desk.
For a really large tv, 4k will make a big difference in quality. But where are you all gaming on the pc? Your living room?
I play games on my computer desk, I am sitting a couple feet away, and I am perfectly happy with 1440p. I want better contrast refresh rates before higher res because at the screen sizes I am going to use on a desk, 1440p is plenty sharp.
diminishing returns
1080p is a horrible resolution for a 27" monitor, 2560x1440p is fantastic. The oversized and VISIBLE pixels melt away on the screen at your desk. The retina display mac has even higher resolution and pixel density, but those stats are MEANINGLESS compared to the size advantage of the 27" panel for a desk.
For a really large tv, 4k will make a big difference in quality. But where are you all gaming on the pc? Your living room?
I play games on my computer desk, I am sitting a couple feet away, and I am perfectly happy with 1440p. I want better contrast refresh rates before higher res because at the screen sizes I am going to use on a desk, 1440p is plenty sharp.
I thought Windows 8.1 was going to have 200% dpi option that would perfectly double everything. I have not seen a single person test it or even mention it again though. maybe I will see if anything pops up on google.I can barely see the text on my 1440P 27". Can't imagine a 4k resolution 27" display, I'd need a microscope.
lol you dont really make games for 4k. 4k is nothing more than a higher 16:9 resolution so nothing special has to be done to the game.Absolutely OP
Games aren't even made for 4k at this time, so it is pointless. Let them get to 1440p first.
I would rock 1440p fast response lightboost 120 hz all day over 4k, any day
lol you dont really make games for 4k. 4k is nothing more than a higher 16:9 resolution so nothing special has to be done to the game.
and you can do that just fine by modding one file just like you had to for 1920x1080 but what does a 10 year old game have to do with your comment? you said games are not even being made for 4k and that makes no sense. any game that works at 1920x1080 will work just fine at 4k.lol think about playing the original DOOM at 4k and you will see the problem
and you can do that just fine by modding one file just like you had to for 1920x1080 but what does a 10 year old game have to do with your comment? you said games are not even being made for 4k and that makes no sense. any game that works at 1920x1080 will work just fine at 4k.
yes clearly I am the one here with no brains. you don't even have the ability to see how stupid what you are saying actually is.It is making no sense because you have no brains.
How does DOOM's graphics compare to BF4's? What if all we had to play were DOOM like games? Should I move to a 4k monitor?
Of course, hell no
Which is pointless. Why would you run medium @ 4k when you can run Ultra at 1440p and the game looks much better? That's what many are talking about.
The point is that some people here have been claiming you need triple Titans or 7990s to game at 4K and that it'll be years before 4K gaming is realistically attainable. And thats blatantly false today, upper tier 20nm cards next year will be handling 4K pretty easily. Once pricing drops on 4K displays, 4K will become the new high end standard for PC gaming. Probably before the end of 2015.
Gonna suck to be a console gamer in 2016, still playing on 900p. :/