AMD Radeon R9 290X with Hawaii GPU pictured, has 512-bit 4GB Memory

Rusty0611 · 16 Oct 2013 at 14:13

It's like the OpenGL argument all over again.

humbug · 16 Oct 2013 at 14:14

Gregster said:
As far as Humbug goes, he will never admit defeat. I would like to see someone game on 8K resolutions with todays horse power....

Guys. no need to get personal. no_1_dave's own illustration explains how the industry connects horizontal pixel lines to come up with "in the case of his illustration" 8K, its 4 2K pixel lines equating to 8K, 6 of them would equate to 12K.

His illustration is for a 4:3 aspect ratio, eyeifinity is a 48:27 ratio, thats where the difference lays, if you wanted 12K in 16:9 you would need to use 6 4K screens. 2 rows of them. its still 12K.

LtMatt · 16 Oct 2013 at 14:15

What does it matter who is right or wrong. Lets argue this years down the line when people start using 4k on a regular basis.

Frenzy · 16 Oct 2013 at 14:15

Orangey said:
Will humbug admit he's wrong? He never does.

OT: All those animes are ghey, I only watch manly shows like Berserk and Ippo.

Lol, they make an anime for hajime no ippo? I thought it was manga only. I'll check it out.

Also, there is gay sex in berserk.

Mal X · 16 Oct 2013 at 14:16

Gregster said:
You heard it here first folks Nice to see you again Mal.

thanks M8, I wont be around much, i'm here just in case i need to replace the card as well, but acording to the bloke in the shop the card still works ok

LtMatt · 16 Oct 2013 at 14:16

Mal always known for blowing up components.

Orangey · 16 Oct 2013 at 14:17

LtMatt said:
What does it matter who is right or wrong. Lets argue this years down the line when people start using 4k on a regular basis.

It's not an argument. It's one gibbering maniac trying to claim that 3 is greater than 4. And not just a little greater, either.

Silent_Scone · 16 Oct 2013 at 14:18

People still scratch their chins over upgrading for 1600p lol.

LtMatt · 16 Oct 2013 at 14:19

MjFrosty said:
People still scratch their chins over upgrading for 1600p lol.

That's not all they scratch either.

Gregster · 16 Oct 2013 at 14:19

BubbySoup said:
But that's just 2 4k screens (according to Humbug).

You have to admit his definition of 8k is far more GPU friendly

Agreed. We might be able to power Humbugs version of 8K with todays GPU's

drunkenmaster · 16 Oct 2013 at 14:21

The only cheaper 4k screen tv's I've see(there is one that hit around $900 in the states) only does 30hz at 4k, it will do higher but only with lower resolution inputs and the like.

30k 4k screens is just not going to happen for gaming... at all. It's supposedly okay for films but it will be sucky for just about anything else.

There is a reason cheap 4k screens are currently cheap, they have huge drawbacks.

A 4k Oled screen at sub £500 with a 120hz refresh rate working of a sensible single cable..... I'm in, it's not particularly close.

I'd spend more on a bigger screen with a 60hz refresh rate as a TV only but not a computer monitor. I only game infrequently on a big screen through console or very occasionally the PC but for my every day gaming and usage... 120hz is where it's at.

http://www.hdtvtest.co.uk/news/seiki-se39uy04-201306253136.htm

That's the screen, it's listed everywhere as a 120hz screen but that is only for 1080p inputs, for 4k it's 30hz but I think.

I think AMD's new standard if it gets adopted meaning one display port cable, no associated royalty cost(I don't think) and the ability to push enough data for high refresh rates could hopefully mean that we get the screens, connections and refresh rates to come together in a couple years and make some really good viable options.

straxusii · 16 Oct 2013 at 14:22

humbug said:
No, your not getting it, your taking the screens Pixels as a whole.

The way your looking at it you need to multiply the amount of pixels by the amount of lines, IE 3840 pixels multiplied by 2160 lines = eight million two hundred and ninety four thousand four hundred: 8.294,400 (8.3MP) times by 3 and you get 24,883,200 pixels. (25mp)

Which is not "No where near 12k, not even close to 8K" the K stands as it always does for "thousand"

Your mixing up the total amount of pixels across one line (Which is where you derive 12K from) with the total amount of pixels in the image as a whole.

No, inexplicably 4k ultrahd does mean 3840 X 2160 ie roughly 8m pixels, quite why they didn't call it 8m or 2160p is anyones guess but 4k UHD standard is about 8m pixels

humbug · 16 Oct 2013 at 14:23

Orangey said:
It's not an argument. It's one gibbering maniac trying to claim that 3 is greater than 4. And not just a little greater, either.

Not at all, you just don't understand it, you though you did, but didn't, got it wrong and acted on your misunderstanding.

Mal X · 16 Oct 2013 at 14:23

LtMatt said:
What does it matter who is right or wrong. Lets argue this years down the line when people start using 4k on a regular basis.

OLED is a better TV monitor....so many of us might still be on 1080p, unless of course, OLED tv is also 4K....could be :eek:

OLED TV looks miles better than 4k, the colours/ contrast are much more superior, plus 4K TV is still only a glorified backlight LED...

a pure gaming monitor will be fine, but i definitely dont trust a 60'' 4K LED tv, because it'll still suffer from backlight bleeding and clouding, LED will always suffer from this.

but what screws up all of this is price, because a really good Panny 65'' 4k OLED ( PURE HEAVEN for gaming ) will cost a fortune, even in 2 years

flopper · 16 Oct 2013 at 14:24

humbug said:
Nvidia also push the Titan as a 4K card,

yea, who has a 4k screen here and with surrond?
marketing is one thing reality for the user is another.

Frenzy said:
So realistically are we going to see 4k screens within the next 2 years at a consumer price level with a decent refresh rate?

Not likely.
its way off for you and me.
I wont loose 120hz soon, its to good to give up the refreshrate of 60 or 30hz is like watching a snail run.

The 290 series is the start of a new era of gaming, Nvidia is hurt and are currently sitting in groups of theraphy asking what they did wrong and cries a lot.

Nordichardware got a 290 card to review today.
I guess its not far away now.

Boomstick777 · 16 Oct 2013 at 14:25

LtMatt said:
This thread is getting boring. This is supposed to be about the 290X.

Agreed, I guess this is what happens when there is no new info.

Who cares about 4K anyway, most people aren't even on 1440P yet

We know AMD and Nvidia care about 4K because they want people to feel like they need more power, don't buy into the hype peeps. 4K is a long ways off for the normal mortal man. Only the Gregster's and Kaapstad's need worry about such things

Orangey · 16 Oct 2013 at 14:30

humbug said:
Not at all, you just don't understand it, you though you did, but didn't, got it wrong and acted on your misunderstanding.

Funny, I should be the one saying that to you. Projecting is a classic sign of panic in a debate.

Maybe you can tell us some stories about your 10-year tenure as a unix sysadmin and how "buggy and unstable" Unix systems are.

** Refrain from personal insults please **

Mal X · 16 Oct 2013 at 14:33

LtMatt said:
Mal always known for blowing up components.

no, better known for Varnishing them

BubbySoup · 16 Oct 2013 at 14:34

So, we have 8 more days of this ... /sigh

Silent_Scone · 16 Oct 2013 at 14:34

On another note...

Look at this from Guru 3D. Hi Greg

.

Battlefield 4 - Running At 4K (4096x2160)
By Hilbert Hagedoorn on: 10/16/2013 07:15 AM | 4 comment(s) ]
Here's an interesting video, showcasing what Battlefield 4 looks like at 4K. Captured by Thirty IR, this video shows Battlefield running at a really high resolution (running at 4800*2560 and being downscaled to 4096*2160) with all its bells and whistles enabled on four Nvidia Titan cards. According to Thirty IR, all settings were maxed out - including Anti-Aliasing (4x MSAA) - and VRAM usage was around 5.1GB

Anyone who mentions turning off MSAA has to sit on the naughty step