• 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?

Superb monitor Greg, very well done. Price is great too.

Really tempted by this but not sure if 3/4 x 780s (3GB) will run into issues with it.

Given how rare it is to find 120Hz 1440p monitors (unless one manually overclocks - which I hear is less than advisable), isn't it going to be an extremely long time by the time we see 120Hz 4k displays?
 
alex_123_fra said:
Superb monitor Greg, very well done. Price is great too.

Really tempted by this but not sure if 3/4 x 780s (3GB) will run into issues with it.

Given how rare it is to find 120Hz 1440p monitors (unless one manually overclocks - which I hear is less than advisable), isn't it going to be an extremely long time by the time we see 120Hz 4k displays?
Click to expand...

That's why I'm staying at 1440p. 4k is still too early. Maybe in a few years I might buy one. I'm just not that interested tbh
 
i think a lot of games dont play at their best all max'd out anyway
some effects are way too distracting etc

what you think of the other stuff about the screen tho greg?
colors, bleed, viewing angles etc
 
Gregster said:
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 :)
Click to expand...

Great thanks a lot, sorry for the derail!

have u thought about any others before purchasing this like the asus 28" with 60hz coming soon?
 
I'm surprised by the performance. I remember when 2560x1600 was the uber res and games even in sli/xfire struggled to break into the 30's max fps. Then again titan by name, titan by nature (cheesy lol). We have also come a long way in multi gpu performance. Hopefully with 4k monitors coming in at good prices it will drive amd/nv to give us better upgrades in the future.
 
Completed testing for a single Titan at 4K.

d4debf33c1e353e1459a01d89351d8a9.jpg


To those that say "4K gaming is years away", I say "Maybe not" :D I have seen no evidence of light bleed, the games play fluid and smooth, the viewing angle is superb and all in all, 4K is very playable now. Sure, we would like max settings with max AA and max frames but there is no need for that. AA can be turned off and it still looks amazing. You have to remember the amount of pixels all squashed into a 28" panel (4 x 1080P monitors) and you can start to see why you don't need AA. You can get very playable frames with decent settings on a single high end GPU. Only the GFX ***** need to have all settings maxed but honestly, there is no need.
 
Now that you have had the monitor over the weekend Greg, what is or will be your preferred monitor for gaming out of this and the vg278 with 3d not being a factor?

Thanks. :)
 
Noob question:

I notice points being made about how dropping the resolution to say, 1080p on a 4k monitor (or indeed running anything other than native resolution) isnt the best idea unless its hardware supported (correct me if I am wrong). So to that end, would it be better to run BF4 at native resolution but dropping the multi sampling rather than dropping the resolution in order to maintain higher frame rates? Or is it really just the same thing (with regards to avoiding the issues of blurring etc)?

I am tempted by the pricing on these but it's the graphics performance I would need to run it at a ''satisfactory'' frame rate that concerns me (for the record I have 2x7950s and when I tried BF4 1920x1200 200% multisampling my PC lol'd at me :()
 
Gregster said:
The Sammy Davanius. No question about it at all. I will still use the Asus for 3D gaming but for the rest of the time, it will be the Sammy :)

I am proper loving it.
Click to expand...

I have just gone all cold and you have confirmed my fear. Getting a 4k monitor soon may be the better option as I could end up wanting one not long after getting a 1440p monitor.

The vg278 is the best monitor I have owned after my old benq 241w but something about the timing of these 4k screens has seriously messed up my plans. The rog swift was my next monitor but even with the amount of features it has, it might not stop me from wanting a 4k monitor.

Thanks Gregster.:)
 
I realise it's only 1 (£800) card in those tests, but not too many of those framerates hit the magic 60fps average and a few of the minimums are a bit nasty (I'm guessing you'd notice the drops).
Hopefully my 290s would have the grunt to do bit better than that in most cases, as long as VRAM wasn't an issue. I keep getting fooled by the price because of the previous prices, but when I really start to consider it the price tag still seems a bit steep.
 
GeneralD said:
I am tempted by the pricing on these but it's the graphics performance I would need to run it at a ''satisfactory'' frame rate that concerns me (for the record I have 2x7950s and when I tried BF4 1920x1200 200% multisampling my PC lol'd at me :()
Click to expand...

Yeah i tried 200% with 8xAA at 1080 was fine without the AA though :) currently running at 150% with 2xAA
 
GeneralD said:
Noob question:

I notice points being made about how dropping the resolution to say, 1080p on a 4k monitor (or indeed running anything other than native resolution) isnt the best idea unless its hardware supported (correct me if I am wrong). So to that end, would it be better to run BF4 at native resolution but dropping the multi sampling rather than dropping the resolution in order to maintain higher frame rates? Or is it really just the same thing (with regards to avoiding the issues of blurring etc)?

I am tempted by the pricing on these but it's the graphics performance I would need to run it at a ''satisfactory'' frame rate that concerns me (for the record I have 2x7950s and when I tried BF4 1920x1200 200% multisampling my PC lol'd at me :()
Click to expand...

I have done both (dropped the res to 1080P and dropped AA) and it is better to drop AA than resolution. Nothing wrong with 1080P on a 4K monitor but it just looks better at 3840x2160 with no AA than it does at 1920x1080 with max AA (If that makes sense?)

Davanius said:
I have just gone all cold and you have confirmed my fear. Getting a 4k monitor soon may be the better option as I could end up wanting one not long after getting a 1440p monitor.

The vg278 is the best monitor I have owned after my old benq 241w but something about the timing of these 4k screens has seriously messed up my plans. The rog swift was my next monitor but even with the amount of features it has, it might not stop me from wanting a 4k monitor.

Thanks Gregster.:)
Click to expand...

No probs and you will not regret it. I would use OcUK for warranty purposes though, as I would have a hard time with warranty if I ever run into issues :)

GoogalyMoogaly said:
I realise it's only 1 (£800) card in those tests, but not too many of those framerates hit the magic 60fps average and a few of the minimums are a bit nasty (I'm guessing you'd notice the drops).
Hopefully my 290s would have the grunt to do bit better than that in most cases, as long as VRAM wasn't an issue. I keep getting fooled by the price because of the previous prices, but when I really start to consider it the price tag still seems a bit steep.
Click to expand...

Yer, £500 is still a chunk of money but then again, this is 4K and I paid £500 for 1080P 120Hz a couple of years ago and others have paid a lot more for 1440P/1600P, so perspective wise, I feel this is cheap.

2x290's will own at 4K :D
 
Gregster said:
I have done both (dropped the res to 1080P and dropped AA) and it is better to drop AA than resolution. Nothing wrong with 1080P on a 4K monitor but it just looks better at 3840x2160 with no AA than it does at 1920x1080 with max AA (If that makes sense?)



No probs and you will not regret it. I would use OcUK for warranty purposes though, as I would have a hard time with warranty if I ever run into issues :)



Yer, £500 is still a chunk of money but then again, this is 4K and I paid £500 for 1080P 120Hz a couple of years ago and others have paid a lot more for 1440P/1600P, so perspective wise, I feel this is cheap.

2x290's will own at 4K :D
Click to expand...

I paid about £425 for 3 x 1080p 120Hz Samsung monitors.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom