Anyone else unimpressed by monitor progress?

[IvanDobskey]

Higher resolution is great as long as you have the GPU grunt to handle it.

I wouldn't buy a 4k pc monitor for this very reason.

 

[4K8KW10]

Higher resolution is great as long as you have the GPU grunt to handle it.

I wouldn't buy a 4k pc monitor for this very reason.

All GPUs can handle a native 4K resolution. It's just gaming but when gaming you can adjust to 1920x1080 or 2444x1600 or whatever else.
Or you might want to play not with Ultra high settings but something more modest.

 

[DragonQ]

All GPUs can handle a native 4K resolution. It's just gaming but when gaming you can adjust to 1920x1080 or 2444x1600 or whatever else.
Or you might want to play not with Ultra high settings but something more modest.

Have you gamed at non-native resolutions? It looks like crap.

 

[4K8KW10]

Have you gamed at non-native resolutions? It looks like crap.

Yes, when needed I do. 4K isn't the first occasion when it might be needed. But even then, I'd rather prefer to adjust the in-game visuals to some playable framerate. No need for everything to be maxed.
You must remember though to keep a non-native resolution with the same proportion - if it is 4K 3840x2160 screen, choose 16:9 resolutions. If it is 4:3 native, choose another 4:3, etc.

The same with TVs. When having a 4K TV, you can still watch standard definition programmes or full hd programmes. They even will look better than on an full hd TV.

 

[IvanDobskey]

No way would I game at a non native resolution. It looks like someone smeared grease on the screen.

For now, 3440x1440 is the perfect balance of pixels/performance for me.

4k looks great, but I'm just not prepared to cough up for dual 1080ti's needed to get a decent frame rate.

For me, it's backlight tech that needs to improve for better blacks and contrast. Backlight bleed needs to be eliminated. Obviously oled would sort all these issues, but it just isn't suited to desktop pc use.

 

[4K8KW10]

For now, 3440x1440 is the perfect balance of pixels/performance for me.

4k looks great, but I'm just not prepared to cough up for dual 1080ti's needed to get a decent frame rate.

Who told you that you need SLi of 1080Ti to get decent framerates with 4K? That's rubbish.

Meanwhile, I'd rather consider for myself something like that Dell UltraSharp 32 8K Monitor: UP3218K. But 32" is just too much, no place where to put it. I'd rather have a 24" 8K screen.

 

[IvanDobskey]

Who told you that you need SLi of 1080Ti to get decent framerates with 4K? That's rubbish.

Meanwhile, I'd rather consider for myself something like that Dell UltraSharp 32 8K Monitor: UP3218K. But 32" is just too much, no place where to put it. I'd rather have a 24" 8K screen.

It will be too expensive on GPUs to run 4k. Too rich for my wallet anyway.

My 1070 needs to last me a while yet.

 

[DragonQ]

Yes, when needed I do. 4K isn't the first occasion when it might be needed. But even then, I'd rather prefer to adjust the in-game visuals to some playable framerate. No need for everything to be maxed.

Agreed.

You must remember though to keep a non-native resolution with the same proportion - if it is 4K 3840x2160 screen, choose 16:9 resolutions. If it is 4:3 native, choose another 4:3, etc.

Yeah...but it still looks like crap. I noticed immediately when Overwatch decided my GPU wasn't powerful enough after plugging in my 1440p monitor and set the render scaling to 75% or something. Even at 50% it looked terrible. 100% with lower settings elsewhere is so much nicer.

The same with TVs. When having a 4K TV, you can still watch standard definition programmes or full hd programmes. They even will look better than on an full hd TV.

Compressed (heavily in the case of TV) video is different to uncompressed sharp graphics seen in games though and I dare say most non-cheap TVs probably have better scalers than monitors which are designed to be run at native resolutions. Try switching your monitor to 1280x720 and watching a 720p video. It'll look like arse compared to just watching it at 1920x1080 and letting your video render scale it.

 

[eddiew]

It will be too expensive on GPUs to run 4k. Too rich for my wallet anyway.

My 1070 needs to last me a while yet.

This is my feeling, tbh. Games will get more demanding to the point where you pretty much always need top-tier GPUs to drive 4k at max details. It feels like a commitment to the latest and greatest at every generation. Possibly in pairs

But I suspect some people are sensitive to pixel size where others aren't. I never looked at a 24" 1200p or a 32" 1440p and thought "man, I wish the pixels were smaller". Never been bothered by "jaggies" in gaming, but I do want to have top textures, bloom, depth of field, etc all enabled. On the other hand, some folks evidently prefer to dial back on these settings in order to have sharper edges.

I just wish monitor manufacturers would offer a bit more choice, e.g. produce the "same" monitor with identical specs but different native resolutions to suit different needs...

 

[David Bisset]

Agreed.


Yeah...but it still looks like crap. I noticed immediately when Overwatch decided my GPU wasn't powerful enough after plugging in my 1440p monitor and set the render scaling to 75% or something. Even at 50% it looked terrible. 100% with lower settings elsewhere is so much nicer.


Compressed (heavily in the case of TV) video is different to uncompressed sharp graphics seen in games though and I dare say most non-cheap TVs probably have better scalers than monitors which are designed to be run at native resolutions. Try switching your monitor to 1280x720 and watching a 720p video. It'll look like arse compared to just watching it at 1920x1080 and letting your video render scale it.

I'm not surprised, render scaling in OW looks terrible. Change the resolution instead and it looks and runs better.