How is the 4k gaming experience?

jktmstokes23 · 6 Feb 2015 at 03:31

How do you enjoy it? Would you say it was worth the big investment? How do games look compared to people who jumped from 1440 or 1600. I've heard some people say it's not worth it in forums while others say the jump from one of those resolutions was like the jump from 1080 to 1440 or 1600.

PCM2 · 6 Feb 2015 at 07:41

I would recommend reading an article on my website entitled "The ‘4K’ UHD (3840 x 2160) Experience". The observations there are based on the 28" models, which provide a very similar experience to 27" models as well. I have separate observations for the 23.8" Dell P2415Q as well, simply because the pixel density is so different.

There is certainly a good jump in clarity and detail from a normal viewing position for a relatively small '4K' screen. But you pay a price for it in the graphical horsepower required, and there are also certain elements in games which look completely out of place at '4K' (i.e. still rubbish). I'm also aware you're looking at the Philips BDM4065UC. That has the same pixel density as a 27" 2560 x 1440 display, so the detail levels are the same as that. But of course the image is much bigger and 'in your face' with those same detail levels, which does make the experience more engrossing.

varkanoid · 6 Feb 2015 at 10:17

Have a look at

4K Gaming

Personally I am loving it and I have 2 x 970SLI!

andybird123 · 6 Feb 2015 at 13:11

I tried 4k gaming and was very impressed (coming from 2560x1440@60hz), however i then got my hands on a ROG Swift and was more impressed with 1440@144hz, so much so i sold the 4K

varkanoid · 6 Feb 2015 at 13:28

I did opposite.

I had both the Rog Swift and the Acer 2k4k and although the build quality of the Swift was better then Acer had much better image quality. To me the Swift looked blurred. I compared them side by side.

The Acer has poor black levels the swift had terrible white levels - like looking through grey fog.

So I kept the Acer and sold the swift.

jktmstokes23 · 6 Feb 2015 at 13:33

PCM2 said:
I would recommend reading an article on my website entitled "The ‘4K’ UHD (3840 x 2160) Experience". The observations there are based on the 28" models, which provide a very similar experience to 27" models as well. I have separate observations for the 23.8" Dell P2415Q as well, simply because the pixel density is so different.

There is certainly a good jump in clarity and detail from a normal viewing position for a relatively small '4K' screen. But you pay a price for it in the graphical horsepower required, and there are also certain elements in games which look completely out of place at '4K' (i.e. still rubbish). I'm also aware you're looking at the Philips BDM4065UC. That has the same pixel density as a 27" 2560 x 1440 display, so the detail levels are the same as that. But of course the image is much bigger and 'in your face' with those same detail levels, which does make the experience more engrossing.

Thank you. What's the link to your site?

So far I like the Philips and the 32 inch Ben Q. The Ben Q is where Im leaning because it looks like it's higher quality plus it is IPS

Marine-RX179 · 6 Feb 2015 at 15:00

jktmstokes23 said:
Thank you. What's the link to your site?

Check the men's signature

tipes · 7 Feb 2015 at 12:22

Just recently purchased a Benq 3201PT - delighted with it so far. Must admit though I may need a second GTX980 to run games with all the eye candy, or maybe an upcoming card with 8Gb of memory. Nice screen though.

Mark

Doogles · 7 Feb 2015 at 14:52

Came from a 1440p IPS to 2160p TN and sent the 2160p back, if it had of been IPS I would have been happy but color shift just annoyed me to much. GPU power is needed also and atm it is probably worth waiting for UHD to become mainstream for monitors, then we will have more options on 144hz/G-Sync etc.

GMac11 · 7 Feb 2015 at 21:09

jktmstokes23 said:
Thank you. What's the link to your site?

So far I like the Philips and the 32 inch Ben Q. The Ben Q is where Im leaning because it looks like it's higher quality plus it is IPS

BenQ is VA (AMVA to be precise I think). I had it briefly and the panel was very nice indeed and games just popped out and looked really good.

I ended up returning it for a Samsung S27D850 because with my setup the BenQ was just too big and I found my neck getting sore after extended use.

But my ergonomic troubles aside I was pleasantly surprised at how good the VA panel was on the BenQ.

tipes · 7 Feb 2015 at 23:06

GMac11 said:
BenQ is VA (AMVA to be precise I think). I had it briefly and the panel was very nice indeed and games just popped out and looked really good.

I ended up returning it for a Samsung S27D850 because with my setup the BenQ was just too big and I found my neck getting sore after extended use.

But my ergonomic troubles aside I was pleasantly surprised at how good the VA panel was on the BenQ.

It isn't VA if he is talking about the 3201PT - which is IPS. Liking mine. Gaming is ok as well as I found out tonight.

Mark

GMac11 · 7 Feb 2015 at 23:45

tipes said:
It isn't VA if he is talking about the 3201PT - which is IPS. Liking mine. Gaming is ok as well as I found out tonight.

Mark

Apologies, I sit corrected. Saw it was AHVA but was not aware this is actually an iteration of IPS.

jktmstokes23 · 9 Feb 2015 at 01:32

Thanks for all the input so far. a lot of early adapters say to wait...

Vega · 9 Feb 2015 at 10:03

Having played many games in 4K, unless the monitor is really large, the benefits weren't huge.

On the desktop, viewing text and high resolution photo's etc 4K is real nice. You lost some of the clarity pop in games though. It really only allows you do drop AA levels.

I'd be much more focused on a lower resolution screen like 1440p, but at 120+ Hz refresh rate and/or with a strobing back light for motion clarity.

Marine-RX179 · 9 Feb 2015 at 10:15

I'm in waiting for a Freesync monitors to become available, but debating whether to go WQHD or UHD.

I will most probably be getting a 27~28" screen...and considering I'm already used to a 120Hz monitor, I think a WQHD IPS 120Hz (if they become available) would be a better choice than a UHD TN panel monitor, especially considering I most probably wouldn't be grabbing another 290x to crossfire?

slade · 9 Feb 2015 at 12:01

I read this with interest.

I'm about to move flats and give my currant TV/monitor (32" Sammy 6 series LED TV 1080p) to my mother. So i'm looking at the Philips 40" 4k (which has only just come into stock here in Aussie) or 32" BenQ BL3200PT or even one of those 34" 21:9 monitors. I'm just worried that 2 x MSI 970's just wont cut the mustard @ 4k... I mean, Witcher 3 will be a GPU killer wont it?!

I need some advice please as i dont have room for tv & monitor...!

(ps. i was also thinking of buying a Panasonic 42" Viera TH42AS700A TV to use as i watch lots of movies/ TV series on my PC)

Smurfin · 9 Feb 2015 at 16:28

Slade: I was originally looking at the 34" 21:9 monitors, then I bought the 32" BenQ BL3200PT, and then I sent it back and bought the Philips 40" 4k.

Very happy with the move, and a huge improvement over 27" 1440p. The 32" just wasn't big enough a jump, and instead felt like a backwards step as the pixel pitch returned to that of a 1080p panel.

I run SLI 970s too and it works great. The good thing is, if you're having trouble running any games @ 4k, the panel scales nicely to 1440p. Win win.

Rofflay · 9 Feb 2015 at 21:34

I imagine true 4K around 27" would be breathtaking. Im using DSR and even that blows my socks off. Last night i went back to 2008 and downloaded GTA IV. I hated that grey game before as it had no AA and was generally doggy poop.

I have to say 3840x2160 DSR at 120hz is a different game... Very tough to run though i only get around 80-90fps maxed on my 980 for the full 120.00 experience i have to turn off shadows really

4K 60/120 should be a base line standard for gaming.

slade · 10 Feb 2015 at 09:11

Smurfin said:
Slade: I was originally looking at the 34" 21:9 monitors, then I bought the 32" BenQ BL3200PT, and then I sent it back and bought the Philips 40" 4k.

Very happy with the move, and a huge improvement over 27" 1440p. The 32" just wasn't big enough a jump, and instead felt like a backwards step as the pixel pitch returned to that of a 1080p panel.

I run SLI 970s too and it works great. The good thing is, if you're having trouble running any games @ 4k, the panel scales nicely to 1440p. Win win.

Ok thanks... think im gonna buy one

RusstheDroog · 11 Feb 2015 at 11:27

Smurfin said:
Slade: I was originally looking at the 34" 21:9 monitors, then I bought the 32" BenQ BL3200PT, and then I sent it back and bought the Philips 40" 4k.

Very happy with the move, and a huge improvement over 27" 1440p. The 32" just wasn't big enough a jump, and instead felt like a backwards step as the pixel pitch returned to that of a 1080p panel.

I run SLI 970s too and it works great. The good thing is, if you're having trouble running any games @ 4k, the panel scales nicely to 1440p. Win win.

Does the downscaling give you much a performance boost? If 4k is too demanding say.