• 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 possible at full settings on todays hardware?

My 2cents
Seeing as two 7950's bottlenecked an i5 2500k that I had on some demanding games at only 1080p I would say an i7 min for anything above 1600p. At this res and above you looking at dual/triple GPU's so you want the best CPU also to feed them.
 
jktmstokes23 said:
"The demands on the CPU become less as you go for a bigger resolution. The 3570K might well cope just fine with 4K :)"


Damn, do you have a link to back this statement up? Not that I don't believe you, but I thought (assumed) higher res meant more demand on cpu, if not... well then... and with dx 12 and mantle coming around I could save on upgrading to an i7.
Click to expand...

I will run a game at low res, all the way to high res and record CPU usage as best as I can.
 
Gregster said:
I will run a game at low res, all the way to high res and record CPU usage as best as I can.
Click to expand...

you are a great man.

Does anyone else on this forum happen to know of a site that may have done something similar to this? CPU usage at highers resolutions... And if crossfired 290s or cards in that range become less bottlenecked at higher resolutions
 
Gregster said:
The demands on the CPU become less as you go for a bigger resolution.
Click to expand...

The core utilization and thread count should be identical, and the CPU bottleneck less apparent. If, for example, at 1080p your GPU is capable of 100 FPS and your CPU can only feed the GPU 50 FPS, the application will run at 50 FPS. However, your GPU may only be capable of 50 FPS at 4K, in which case you'll still get 50 FPS, but your CPU now isn't bottlenecking your GPU.

This is assuming the game is well-made, unlike some older titles or even newer [usually Japanese] ones which use the CPU for a large amount of operations which could be carried out on the GPU (Halo 1, FFXI, FFXIV, Dark Souls...)
 
jktmstokes23 said:
you are a great man.

Does anyone else on this forum happen to know of a site that may have done something similar to this? CPU usage at highers resolutions... And if crossfired 290s or cards in that range become less bottlenecked at higher resolutions
Click to expand...

LegendaryDread said:
The core utilization and thread count should be identical, and the CPU bottleneck less apparent. If, for example, at 1080p your GPU is capable of 100 FPS and your CPU can only feed the GPU 50 FPS, the application will run at 50 FPS. However, your GPU may only be capable of 50 FPS at 4K, in which case you'll still get 50 FPS, but your CPU now isn't bottlenecking your GPU.

This is assuming the game is well-made, unlike some older titles or even newer [usually Japanese] ones which use the CPU for a large amount of operations which could be carried out on the GPU (Halo 1, FFXI, FFXIV, Dark Souls...)
Click to expand...

I will be testing it but I have noticed that GPU usage is good across both, where at 1080P, I was seeing less usage on both. I put this down to a CPU bottleneck at times but will fire up a CPU intensive game and see how the cores are pushed at various settings.

I could well be wrong and it is something else but only one way to find out :)
 
Did some testing in BF4 and deffo GPU usage is constantly around the 99% at 4K resolution but hard to tell what CPU usage is, as it is constantly fluctuating. At 1080P, I see one of the cores going to 90% but at 4K, I didn't see anywhere near that and 72% was the highest.

@ Elite, I didn't but that isn't to say you wouldn't need to. I got lucky :)
 
couple questions, im not a gamer but would my gtx 660ti cope with this monitor at 4k?

also im not sure whether to hold off for the asus 28" coming out also with 60hz (very unsure on a release date)

is this samsung able to tilt forwards and backwards or is it in a completely fixed position?

Thanks
 
jamjam1 said:
couple questions, im not a gamer but would my gtx 660ti cope with this monitor at 4k?

also im not sure whether to hold off for the asus 28" coming out also with 60hz (very unsure on a release date)

is this samsung able to tilt forwards and backwards or is it in a completely fixed position?

Thanks
Click to expand...

If you're not gaming, then yes your card will run a 4k monitor without issue... Though it begs the question why you have a 660ti if not for gaming?
 
jamjam1 said:
couple questions, im not a gamer but would my gtx 660ti cope with this monitor at 4k?

also im not sure whether to hold off for the asus 28" coming out also with 60hz (very unsure on a release date)

is this samsung able to tilt forwards and backwards or is it in a completely fixed position?

Thanks
Click to expand...

The monitor is in a fixed position, with no tilt or swivel. Very poor but thankfully, it is at the angle I need. A 660Ti will power it :)
 
V F said:
Whats with this…

10,000,000:1 Contrast Ratio

- Contrast Ratio: 1000:1 (Typ)

Seems weak for such a huge drop.
Click to expand...

all monitors have both a dynamic ratio and static, the dynamic one is basically made up, the static one is what to look for, and actually if you look at the spec for most IPS monitors they also say 1000:1
 
andybird123 said:
all monitors have both a dynamic ratio and static, the dynamic one is basically made up, the static one is what to look for, and actually if you look at the spec for most IPS monitors they also say 1000:1
Click to expand...

I've never seen Apple's displays with dynamic contrast ratio… It's fixed. The thick CCFL's were roughly 700:1 and the current LED are 1000:1.

Dynamic contrast would be very tiring on the eyes.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom