do you ever wish? you could settle for less?

[ExoMale]

Good post DG. Personally I've never looked at FPS, I just like putting games at max settings and see if the game feels smooth. I dial the AA back if I can't get the smooth performance.

exactly how you should look at it really, until finding out about FRAPS few years ago FPS has never been a concern for monitoring, i do it now as i compare and if i make a video be it for youtube or friends/family wanting to know about it in a game, but i have and always will have that same train of thought of test what it can do and dial back if need be.

its main reason when i used to build and upgrade old computers i used to have fun with it, mean something about trying to get crysis to run on a socket 754 sempron 1.8mhz and a gt 210 1gb graphics card i found very interesting and funny

 

[TNA]

exactly how you should look at it really, until finding out about FRAPS few years ago FPS has never been a concern for monitoring, i do it now as i compare and if i make a video be it for youtube or friends/family wanting to know about it in a game, but i have and always will have that same train of thought of test what it can do and dial back if need be.

its main reason when i used to build and upgrade old computers i used to have fun with it, mean something about trying to get crysis to run on a socket 754 sempron 1.8mhz and a gt 210 1gb graphics card i found very interesting and funny

I used to love tinkering to get Crysis to run better with highest settings (no AA) and would be the first game to test when I got a new GPU. I think that game made me upgrade my GPU a lot more than would have otherwise.

With the Crysis developers in such a bad state, Nvidia or AMD should pay them to make a new Crysis PC only that pushes graphics cards again

 

[Griffildur]

Consoles have a longer cycle than PCs which is why they give this feeling that starts from "it's good enough" which gradually fades to "PCs are so much better".

For instance, PS4 started with Jaguar CPUs and 7870 graphics. It's still the same thing with slightly faster graphics (RX470 level?) after the recent "Pro" upgrade. When it was first released, it was a good little gaming rig, but now it's just subpar compared to 4 years of PC upgrades.

At the end of this year, when Scorpio comes out, you may have a Zen/Vega rig and it'll start all over again: consoles will be 'good little gaming rigs' and seem like awesome bang for buck. Now, fast forward to 2 years later with PCs on Zen++ and Navi ...not so awesome anymore, right?

The good thing about consoles is that things 'just work'. You don't have to worry about settings, you know you'll get 1080@60 basically... If you had a console released every year, it would break the model as games cannot guarantee that level of performance over the past 4 years of released consoles.



I've read this from so many people... Same about when they went from 60 to 144Hz. Same about going to 4K.

I wonder if there's some choice-supportive bias involved. If you did not have a 1440p, just experienced it at some demonstration rig in a PC store, then went back to your 1080p at home... would you still feel the same?

In any case, to me, minor updates don't really matter. 1080p to 1440p? Not so much. 1080p to 4K? Yes, that's a nice upgrade. I just need it to be 60Hz.

Which is, I guess, the reason I don't upgrade. Even a GTX1080 does not do a minimum of 4K@60 easily with room to spare. By the time they achieve this, the cards will be more reasonably priced, and there'll be cards doing 5K at just about 60FPS, but I won't care!

1080p to 1440p was not a minor upgrade at all. And 60 hz just doesn't work for me. It's actually quite tiring on my eyes. i spend a lot of time in front on a computer so the monitor is one of the most important things for me.

Also, some people are happy to wait for years and years, I am not, I just want really good quality all the time and I am not going to stay on 1080p for whatever reason. Your mileage may vary of course and there's nothing wrong with that. No one says we should all do exactly the same thing like freaking robots

 

[chongker]

On 2560*1440 now, couldn't go back to 1080p for long really. Had a play with the Philips 40" 4K monitor that my sister uses, what a beast! But I'll probably skip 4k 16:9 and save up for an epic ultrawide instead next.

 

[Kirby Wurm]

In reply to the OP yes I do regret it in some small way. I moved from 144hz 1080 TN with a GTX 970 to a 980 Ti and 1440 144hz IPS about a year ago. In most ways it's amazing and provides a noticeably better experience, but on the other hand the hardware required to keep good frames on this setup down the line will be daunting. Yes, it's badly optimised but Deus Ex Mankind Divided made me realise how I'll have to sacrifice frames/IQ or keep forking out for beefy cards. As some have said though I learned once again to forget about FPS and just enjoy the games I'm playing.

 

[The-Plethora]

I have a 1080 at the moment and it handles everything I through at it with room to spare at 1080p so no plans to change at the moment. When people say I can run such and such a game at 4K at medium settings I kinda think what's the point in that? Clearly the system cannot handle it then, also 30fps is terrible.

 

[TNA]

I have a 1080 at the moment and it handles everything I through at it with room to spare at 1080p so no plans to change at the moment. When people say I can run such and such a game at 4K at medium settings I kinda think what's the point in that? Clearly the system cannot handle it then, also 30fps is terrible.

With my 1070 I ran Resident Evil 7 maxed out after turning of undesirable settings such as depth of field,motion blur and using ssao vs hbao which I did not see the difference in anyway. Was getting around 60fps average. Run smooth as butter and it looked so much better than playing it 1080p which I tried also on a new monitor I purchased a few days ago which got promptly sent back.

Even Deus Ex Mankind Divided I got around 45fps average with maximum settings doing the same as above and also turning off contact hardening shadows. 45fps felt smooth enough to me in that game and I got the better graphics as a result vs playing on lower resolutions. Horses for courses I suppose. But never once have I had to use medium settings at 4K, that would be pointless then.

 

[Perfect_Chaos]

Thinking of getting one of those 27" 4k 144hz screens some time this year, but i might regret it.. lower frame rates & IPS, I'm used to smoother motion and hardly any BLB. Plus the price will be really high, probably not far off a much bigger decent telly.

Too bad 1440p won't show perfectly on a 4k screen.

 

[smogsy]

Thinking of getting one of those 27" 4k 144hz screens some time this year, but i might regret it.. lower frame rates & IPS, I'm used to smoother motion and hardly any BLB. Plus the price will be really high, probably not far off a much bigger decent telly.

Too bad 1440p won't show perfectly on a 4k screen.

^ i wouldn't

after owning and still using
4K rog swift
1440 swift
X34A 1440p 21:9

4K is incredible but getting to barely 60 is hard.

if you dont mind:
1. 6-9 month upgrade cycle
2. using medium settings
3. 32"+

then go for it but if not DONT

99.9% of the time my 4K swift is unplugged in the cupboard.

its no good for browsing & even a 1080 can struggle at 4K

 

[Perfect_Chaos]

^ So what would you recommend? Don't know where to go next, difficult to decide. 4k that can display 1080p or 1440p perfectly would be ideal with those 144hz hdr screens coming out spring/summer.. so irritated, that would be ideal but i know it won't work like that because they never do.

 

[BluD]

No offence but I wouldn't exactly call the system in your signature "bang for buck" !

Thats because you dont know how much i payed for it and when i bought it, i found buying last get gear much cheaper.