Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Sep 2009
- Posts
- 30,502
- Location
- Dormanstown.
3440X1440, I'm 21:9. 4k at 16:9 doesn't interest me.
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 ^^^^ ?
If they want to game on PC's, perhaps as to avoid being locked into XBox live repeat subscription fees, then they are going to have to get a monitor anyway.
If they want to game on PC's, perhaps as to avoid being locked into XBox live repeat subscription fees, then they are going to have to get a monitor anyway.
Why wouldn't they get a ps4?
Why wouldn't they use their hdtv?
What happens if they already have a monitor? This is just getting into strawmen arguments now.
The fact is some people find sub 30fps awful no matter what, the others find it perfectly playable and if they wanted to do anything about it they already could have by buying even a £100 GPU. Could freesync make sub 30fps a little better? Maybe
This is just getting into strawmen arguments now
I haven't used one brush, in the very post you've quoted me in I've used two.
So you tell me, will there be people buying monitors?
Some will have to, some won't.
Could freesync make sub 30fps a little better? Maybe
Thats all i'm saying![]()
Erm. No you didn't.
I think Free-Sync working at below 30 FPS is quite important, i very much doubt 9 FPS is anything like smooth even with Free-Sync, but 24< FPS is, i think its important to make it available across the full spectrum so those with entry level GPU's or APU's 'that can't always maintain 30+ FPS' still get the benefit of Free-Sync Smoothieness...
Lads...really?![]()
It's a 30 minute bus ride.
You forgot to include the potential cost for people in that post though, which is the biggest point especially for those on low budget hardware.