Religion 4k Club

[leggy]

Ok understood. I don't run multiple monitors so I guess it didn't occur to me

Thanks

 

[Zarjazz]

Frankly I may just wait for a really good 60fps 30" 5k screen since that's the same resolution as 4 x 1400p monitors, and probably a next-gen card (or two) to run it.

 

[ECA]

Frankly I may just wait for a really good 60fps 30" 5k screen since that's the same resolution as 4 x 1400p monitors, and probably a next-gen card (or two) to run it.

Might be waiting quite a while unfortunately, until 5k TVs start hitting you won't see monitor panel prices come down While 4k is coming down in price, 5k isn't even on the horizon for TV manufacturers mass market models.

28" 4k panels are now coming in at £250-300

 

[Scouse]

28" 4k panels are now coming in at £250-300

And after seeing a mates setup I'd still plump for one 1080p 42" telly.

Until displays become a lot cheaper and a LOT bigger at higher resolutions - and the hardware required to run games at those resolutions is much cheaper too - I just won't bother. Simply because there are no games nowadays that push the graphical envelope.

 

[ECA]

It's noticeable even in games as potato as dota2/lol. I guess you should get to specsavers

 

[Scouse]

It's noticeable even in games as potato as dota2/lol. I guess you should get to specsavers

I know it's noticeable. It's pretty clear.

But worth the extreme investment? I'm not so sure. Elite came closest to converting me but I think I'll wait for VR to do it's thing.

 

[ECA]

£250 for a dell 4k monitor is an extreme investment? I had a friend buy a 27" 1080p last year and he paid around the same price.
My current 27"s cost me more than that as well ( around 270 iirc ).

If you have a 280x/gtx970 or above imo 4k is super doable now for most older/popular games, and still good for new games if you can sacrifice a few settings.

If you need to buy a graphics card+monitor, then you're looking at ~£500.

Wouldn't call that extreme.

 

[Scouse]

I'd have to buy a whole new PC to run 4k on a much smaller screen that I already game on.

And for what? Less jaggies and better long distance definition?

I'd want a 50" 4k screen if I were to upgrade (running 42" atm) and even then - games dont push graphical boundaries like they used to as they've been hobbled by consoles - and they all work fine on my very aged rig.

Outlay ain't worth it for me I'm afraid. Even if just to preserve my actual screen size, if nothing else. A big screen > higher resolution on a small screen IMO.

 

[Exioce]

Will be bagging a GTX980 or equivalent when the Oculus Rift (or whatever is best) is released. May as well get a replacement for my old 1050p 22" at the time. Will do me fine until then.

 

[Moriath]

I am with @Scouse on this one. Cant see thhe point in the extra resolution at the moment. 1080p is enough for me. And two 24 inch screens work better for me than one 30 inch. I like to have stuff on the second monitor. Chat programs etc. and i hate playing games in windows. So having a single 4k screen just wouldnt work for me.

The rift or whatever the sony one is will be good forr my upgrade needs when it comes.

 

[Raven]

Also on 2 monitors and it works for me at the moment. Going to get a 4k screen when the new AMD cards come out, will then run a single 4k and a 2nd 1080 screen for netflix, vent etc.

No point at the moment if you can't run games at 60fps and you can't! unless you are running SLI and I am certainly not getting 2 £400 cards, plus the cost of the screen. I would rather have 1080 and 60fps+ and all the goodies than 4k and ~30fps and less goodies.

The difference between 30 and 60fps would be even more apparent on a larger screen too wouldn't it?

 

[ECA]

No point at the moment if you can't run games at 60fps and you can't! unless you are running SLI

??? Demonstrably false.

 

[Raven]

No, true.

Try running Skyrim with mods, or GTA5, or BF4, or any other relatively modern game with graphical enhancements turned on at a consistent 60fps at 4k without 2 £400+ cards in SLI.

Not happening, full stop. Maybe possible on older less graphically intensive games or modern low texture quality indi games but not many.

Or maybe you know something all the benchmarkers don't know?

 

[Raven]

Example of benchmarks

http://www.techspot.com/review/898-geforce-gtx-970-sli-4k-gaming/page2.html

er...so yeah, around 30fps...no ta.

I have a single 290x and I know that there is no way on earth it could run GTA5 at 4k it (only just) runs at 1080 60fps with the occasional drop, with a couple of things turned down from ultra.

 

[ECA]

Shitty console ports don't really count.

 

[Raven]

Ok...which games that aren't cross platform are you playing at 4k?

 

[ECA]

There are plenty of decent ports that do run at acceptable FPS, GTA V, Darksouls 2, etc. will all hit 60fps on a single card setup.

 

[Raven]

Except GTA 5 wont without SLI.

http://www.pcgamer.com/grand-theft-auto-5-gameplay-max-settings-at-60fps/

They just about hit 60fps with 2 titans in SLI. No way on earth you can do it with 1.

The only acceptable framerate is 60+

 

[ECA]

http://www.tweaktown.com/tweakipedia/83/grand-theft-auto-benchmarked-1080p-1440p-4k/index.html

Rockstar has done an astonishing job here folks, with $300-$400 cards capable of 4K at 60FPS, this is amazing. You don't need to buy a second or third VGA card for 3-way SLI or Crossfire, as you might have noticed, SLI and Crossfire didn't fare that well, or weren't providing a huge benefit to the game right now

Read more at http://www.tweaktown.com/tweakipedia/83/grand-theft-auto-benchmarked-1080p-1440p-4k/index.html

Also this isnt the "I dont wanna play 4k because z/y/x thread", start a 1080p thread or something

 

[ECA]

Except GTA 5 wont without SLI.

http://www.pcgamer.com/grand-theft-auto-5-gameplay-max-settings-at-60fps/

They just about hit 60fps with 2 titans in SLI. No way on earth you can do it with 1.

The only acceptable framerate is 60+

From the article you linked:

When comparing any of the framerates we’ve listed to your own, remember this very important difference: we are trying to record while we play the game. For GTA5 and most of our videos, we use Nvidia’s ShadowPlay which generally has a low impact on performance. However, it is noticeable and it scales with resolution. It isn’t uncommon for us to see our frame rates cut in half while recording at 4K.

I mean, cmon? at least read the shit you link.

 

[Raven]

Thats the recording. Not proper benchmarking. Just look at Any professional benchmarking site and see the comparisons on a variety of games. Besides, they were using 2 cards in SLI, not a single card test.

Single card 4k gaming will be viable with the next gen of cards and not before.

 

[ECA]

Check the link I posted lol.
Gonna have to make a new thread with all the bullshit in here

 

[Raven]

Those aren't max settings...

 

[caLLous]

Why the shit would they write an article specifically about how well a game runs and then deliberately cripple the system by recording the gameplay simultaneously? Surely you would do a run for benchmarking (to eek out the maximum possible fps) and then a run for recording, not produce the results from doing both at the same time and then put a wishy-washy disclaimer at the side.

Anyway, the quality has to be turned up, that's the point @ECA. Of course you can get acceptable performance with middle of the road settings (and I know you can do without AA at 4k) but to get 60fps at 4k with everything wanged up to the max, you need a beastly multi-card system.

 

[Scouse]

Also this isnt the "I dont wanna play 4k because z/y/x thread", start a 1080p thread or something

Fair point

 

[Zarjazz]

Might be waiting quite a while unfortunately, until 5k TVs start hitting you won't see monitor panel prices come down While 4k is coming down in price, 5k isn't even on the horizon for TV manufacturers mass market models.

28" 4k panels are now coming in at £250-300

Well I have 3 x 27" 1440p screens at home & work so I'm not exactly short of pixels at present So 4k doesn't seem like that much of an upgrade to me. However the 5k screens I have seen are amazing, retina level resolution. But I don't think those panels or graphics cards are quite upto the level to run at high FPS for gaming just yet. Hence why I think I'll wait a generation or two.