4k Gaming monitors worth it ?

Rroff · 27 Jul 2014 at 19:40

PCM2 said:
Having contacted Samsung engineers and AOC about it and having tested for such things myself it actually seems likely that these monitors are 'true 10-bit'. Either way they're clearly 'high quality TN' panels as some people would say.

And for everyone on the fence about '4K' or for those who have it but want another perspective on things you'll love this upcoming article I'm working on. It's pretty massive. I was originally going to integrate it into the Samsung UHD review but decided it was far too large and detailed for that.

Well its atleast true 8bit - I'm not in a position to test if its true 10bit or 8bit + FRC heh.

PCM2 · 27 Jul 2014 at 19:47

Rroff said:
Well its atleast true 8bit - I'm not in a position to test if its true 10bit or 8bit + FRC heh.

No of course not.

I'm one of the people who originally insisted that it must be 8-bit + FRC so was quite surprised by these recent findings.

Born_2_Kill_83 · 28 Jul 2014 at 10:21

Would CF290X's be enough to max BF4 @ 4K?
I really want a 4K but I'll be comming from 120hz which I dont no whether I'll notice the drop down.

Quartz · 28 Jul 2014 at 11:31

Born_2_Kill_83 said:
Would CF290X's be enough to max BF4 @ 4K?
I really want a 4K but I'll be comming from 120hz which I dont no whether I'll notice the drop down.

I don't know about maxxing BF4 but why not enjoy the best of both worlds by having both monitors? Game at 120 Hz when you prefer the high refresh rate and game at 4K when you prefer the resolution.

llamadal · 28 Jul 2014 at 11:42

The solution is quite simple, if you think you will like 4k, buy it and see for yourself.

Only your own opinion matters when it comes to what you use every day, I have a friend tell me his asus 120hz was the best screen ever.... needless to say the colours were terrible and after 10 minutes of using it I wanted to cut my eyes open with a razor - thats in comparison with the benq xl2410t which I was using at the time.... again not exactly great for anything other than fps games where you dont care about the look of the game.

VincentHanna · 28 Jul 2014 at 12:30

llamadal said:
The solution is quite simple, if you think you will like 4k, buy it and see for yourself.

Only your own opinion matters when it comes to what you use every day, I have a friend tell me his asus 120hz was the best screen ever.... needless to say the colours were terrible and after 10 minutes of using it I wanted to cut my eyes open with a razor - thats in comparison with the benq xl2410t which I was using at the time.... again not exactly great for anything other than fps games where you dont care about the look of the game.

Could have just been poorly configured of course...

snips86x · 28 Jul 2014 at 12:32

You can also downscale to 1440p on a 4K panel if performance at 4k needs some extra grunt - like an additional g/card.

llamadal · 28 Jul 2014 at 12:37

VincentHanna said:
Could have just been poorly configured of course...

if you polish a turd, it's still a turd.

It was just bad in comparison to other options, nothing else.

VincentHanna · 28 Jul 2014 at 14:03

llamadal said:
if you polish a turd, it's still a turd.

It was just bad in comparison to other options, nothing else.

I'm not disputing what you said.

I've not seen either of the monitors you mentioned. It's just that some monitors are horrible out of the box and people often don't take the time to set them up.

I'm not talking about full on calibration, but often people just stick with default settings and it can make a good monitor look pretty bad.

Captain · 28 Jul 2014 at 15:14

Born_2_Kill_83 said:
Would CF290X's be enough to max BF4 @ 4K?
I really want a 4K but I'll be comming from 120hz which I dont no whether I'll notice the drop down.

I went from 144Hz to 4K and noticed no lag or stuttering when gaming @ 60Hz.

I bought Greg's Samsung 4K monitor and it's excellent for gaming, No doubt this will be my monitor for a long time.

Phixsator · 29 Jul 2014 at 16:54

Clov!s said:
I went from 144Hz to 4K and noticed no lag or stuttering when gaming @ 60Hz.

I bought Greg's Samsung 4K monitor and it's excellent for gaming, No doubt this will be my monitor for a long time.

When i tried out a 60hz IPS monitor i noticed a clear difference in smoothness/lag and stuttering, but that could ofcourse be down to the fact that it was an IPS monitor to begin with.

andybird123 · 29 Jul 2014 at 17:01

Yes, IPS are well know for being better at colours and viewing angles (now arguable for gaming) but worse at fast motion, with much lower response times

darth.mader · 29 Jul 2014 at 17:01

Not worth it. Needing 3 GPU's put me off.

Phixsator · 29 Jul 2014 at 17:12

darth.mader said:
Not worth it. Needing 3 GPU's put me off.

I dont think you need 3 GPUs unless you want to max everything. Considering how many frames i already in a game like BF4, constantly hitting the 200 ceiling(ofcourse not maxed out) i think 55-60 fps should be possible, throw in tech like gsync and it should help smooth the experience. Considering the next gen of graphics cards are around the corner, 1 should be fine for low to medium details @60hz, where 2 most likely would be needed for medium to high details, as long as its not some horrible console port done wrong.

spoffle · 29 Jul 2014 at 17:18

darth.mader said:
Not worth it. Needing 3 GPU's put me off.

You don't need 3 GPUs

PCM2 · 29 Jul 2014 at 17:24

Phixsator said:
When i tried out a 60hz IPS monitor i noticed a clear difference in smoothness/lag and stuttering, but that could ofcourse be down to the fact that it was an IPS monitor to begin with.

Which monitor was it? Modern IPS/PLS monitors are every bit as fast in practice when it comes to perceived motion blur, at 60Hz. http://forums.overclockers.co.uk/sh...ighlight=responsiveness+username_blackoctagon

Highly relevant to this thread is the fact that the TN panel used in these '4K' monitors are considerably slower on a technical level than the fastest 60Hz monitors. In fact some transitions are slower than fast IPS-type models. But as above actual pixel response times are only one small piece of the puzzle.

Quartz · 29 Jul 2014 at 19:05

You don't need 3 GPUs.

I have just started Tomb Raider and getting a solid 60 fps at 4K on normal with some high settings. AA and Tress FX off. This on a single 780 Ti. I'm sure I can take the settings higher.

Rroff · 29 Jul 2014 at 19:08

Quartz said:
You don't need 3 GPUs.

I have just started Tomb Raider and getting a solid 60 fps at 4K on normal with some high settings. AA and Tress FX off. This on a single 780 Ti. I'm sure I can take the settings higher.

Depends how picky you are about settings - I can play a lot of stuff at ~60fps with a single heavily OC'd 780 aslong as I keep AA off and/or use FXAA where appropriate, sometimes have to turn off/down 1-2 specific options. Infact I'm generally more concerned about butting up against the VRAM limits than the core performance.

Would definitely be a lot more comfortable with 2x 6GB GPUs though.

PCM2 said:
Highly relevant to this thread is the fact that the TN panel used in these '4K' monitors are considerably slower on a technical level than the fastest 60Hz monitors. In fact some transitions are slower than fast IPS-type models. But as above actual pixel response times are only one small piece of the puzzle.

Sadly something I'm noticing waaay too much hence my hesitation at recommending them for gaming use in several threads. BF4 especially I notice just how slow they are for some stuff but I can even see it in video playback in some sections.

Captain · 29 Jul 2014 at 19:09

darth.mader said:
Not worth it. Needing 3 GPU's put me off.

Not true.

My 7990 maxes out every game i have @ 4K res with no issues at all.

Born_2_Kill_83 · 31 Jul 2014 at 10:02

4k, what a way to game. Just taken delivery of my Samsung 4k, and BF4 looks like BF5, so much sharper, 1080 feels like I was gaming under water theres thats much difference.

As for GPU power my 290x's kill it, I was thinking I'd be struggling for 50FPS in BF4 but I average 90, turned it down to 59fps as my GPU's where working at 100% and creating a lot of heat.
A overclocked 780ti or 290x lighting or such is more than enough to get acceptable FPS on 4K, no where near as demanding as some make out, "hardware isnt ready for 4K yet" etc etc, it is!