• Competitor rules

    Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.

4K gaming makes mincemeat of current GPU's!

I suspect once the next gen consoles have been out for a year or two things will start accelerating quite fast.

As in new tech will start coming out and becoming mainstream.
 
I agree that amd/nvidia need to up their ante in the next few coming generations but I personally dont see 4K coming into play that quickly, and I'd personally like to see some more work being put into the likes of good quality 2560x1440/1600 with 120Hz refresh rates natively, and not have to overclock a monitor to get the higher refresh rates etc, but I see these being off in the distance too lol
 
Doco said:
I agree that amd/nvidia need to up their ante in the next few coming generations but I personally dont see 4K coming into play that quickly, and I'd personally like to see some more work being put into the likes of good quality 2560x1440/1600 with 120Hz refresh rates natively, and not have to overclock a monitor to get the higher refresh rates etc, but I see these being off in the distance too lol
Click to expand...

2560-resolution screens have always been something of a niche market, and it's set to remain that way. The big players in screen technology have mostly embraced "4k" resolutions (i.e. 3840x2160 format), as their next target for high-end consumer TV sets. PC monitors will inevitably go in the same direction.

4K TVs and monitors will be extremely expensive for the next couple of years, but prices will drop and more options will become available. I really hope that there are good quality 120Hz options in the pipeline... 120Hz will require higher bandwidth interfaces (new displayport standards presumably), but it will also mean TN panels while we're still using LCD, which would be a bit of a step backwards.


Personally I'm still holding out for OLED. It's been relatively slow moving from prototypes to the marketplace for the larger screens, but 40"+ OLED TVs / monitors at 120Hz+ and 4k res, should be accessible within three years or so. Demand for OLED screens will be high, particularly in the TV segment, as they're so very different. This should help prices drop reasonably quickly - as should competition between LG and Samsung (the two biggest players in OLED TV tech development).
 
Fair enough 2560X"xxxx" probably is a more niche market, even now a lot more noise is being made about the jump to 4k, totally agree, however I dont see the 4k tv really hitting it off as much as hyped in the next few years, what in all honesty can you watch in 4k? unless you have 4k content, even 1080p content is going to look shabby on them (argument can be made that for tv you do sit further away and it'l be less noticeable) and I dont see an uber-blu ray format coming out anytime soon for films, let alone tv stations broadcasting in 4k, so 4k tvs will arrive and in day-to-day usage wont look that impressve unless youve got the proper content to view in.

Pc monitors in 4k will play a larger role (I think), the usual cases of more real-estate for professionals and epic quality gaming (if you have the grunt power) but I think even then it'l probably end up in the same niche market as 2560 for quite a while though, just realized I seem awful pessimistic here XD but gotta be done - spur on more conversation :P
 
I agree that any benefit to a 4k TV is debatable... Most HD TV is heavily compressed as it is, and even with good quality sources (BR, digital etc) the difference from 1080p at normal viewing distances is minimal.

But that's another matter entirely... The manufacturers are always pushing new standards for the high-end, and they are moving to make 4k resolutions standard in their ultra-high end TVs. The amount of 4k content will (slowly) increase as more 4K TVs are available, but I think it will remain a very high-end niche market for a while. It's a shame, as for computing a 4k resolution screen at 30-36" would be ideal, but the computing market will move with the TV market. I expect 4k screens to be in the £1.5k+ bracket for a couple of years.

OLED will be a different story though. OLED screens are extremely thin and can be mounted in novel ways, and they have excellent colour reproduction. As soon as the manufacturing processes can be ramped up the consumer demand will be high, and will help push down prices more quickly. I'm hoping that the premium for 4k may reduce somewhat along with OLED.
 
we i personally cant wait to be able to afford one, i also don't see any reason why 2 x 780's cant push a 4k monitor along quite nicely, i don't think there is any need for high amounts of aa at 4k, i don't use high amounts of aa on my 1600p monitor because it dosen't need it, and it runs fine with a single 780, in fact i have enabled v sync as i see no need to be going over the 60 fps mark.
 
Duff-Man said:
I agree that any benefit to a 4k TV is debatable... Most HD TV is heavily compressed as it is, and even with good quality sources (BR, digital etc) the difference from 1080p at normal viewing distances is minimal.

But that's another matter entirely... The manufacturers are always pushing new standards for the high-end, and they are moving to make 4k resolutions standard in their ultra-high end TVs. The amount of 4k content will (slowly) increase as more 4K TVs are available, but I think it will remain a very high-end niche market for a while. It's a shame, as for computing a 4k resolution screen at 30-36" would be ideal, but the computing market will move with the TV market. I expect 4k screens to be in the £1.5k+ bracket for a couple of years.

OLED will be a different story though. OLED screens are extremely thin and can be mounted in novel ways, and they have excellent colour reproduction. As soon as the manufacturing processes can be ramped up the consumer demand will be high, and will help push down prices more quickly. I'm hoping that the premium for 4k may reduce somewhat along with OLED.
Click to expand...

Aye oled screens will make a bigger impact I think, mostly because, as you've stated, a lot thinner and is more functional - being all mounted etc I'd still like to see progress being made in IPS panels with 120Hz+ refresh rates, so we wouldnt have to choose between the two, but I guess thats having your cake and eating too lol

In response to nalla - good point on the AA, as the higher the res we go the less jaggies appear naturally because of the higher pixel density, so I'd have to wonder how much AA would actually be needed in games.
 
nalla said:
we i personally cant wait to be able to afford one, i also don't see any reason why 2 x 780's cant push a 4k monitor along quite nicely, i don't think there is any need for high amounts of aa at 4k, i don't use high amounts of aa on my 1600p monitor because it dosen't need it, and it runs fine with a single 780, in fact i have enabled v sync as i see no need to be going over the 60 fps mark.
Click to expand...

They can but it is largely irrelevant as almost no one will be buying a 4k display right now or even in the next year, let alone game on it.

By the time these become common market, GPUs will be at least 2 generations along as will CPUs and we will most likely be in the DDR4 era. I'd quite happily wait for the GTX 980 or whatever it will be called and play on these screens with a single GPU.
 
The gtx Cronos perhaps lol
(maybe if we come up with a name years in advance it might catch on :P)
 
OptimaLnrg said:
Completely out of reach

Which is why when people recommend double vram cards for future-proofing they need a slap
Click to expand...

but if you were to try that on a London card you would find it couldn't cope because it has a double decker bus instead of the new bendy in the middle bus :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom