• 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.

If next year's consoles do 4k/60..

CuriousTomCat said:
You're all obsessed with 4k.

I'd much rather see developers concentrate their efforts on improving graphics and found better methods to remove jagged edges etc.
Click to expand...
i do see your point but having 1:1 pixel mapping with no need for scaling is a nice thing to have imo. 1080p on a 1080p screen looks much better than 1080p on a QHD screen for instance.
 
CuriousTomCat said:
You're all obsessed with 4k.

I'd much rather see developers concentrate their efforts on improving graphics and found better methods to remove jagged edges etc.
Click to expand...


Funny you should say that since higher resolution is the easiest way to reduce jagged edges. I guess you played yourself
 
CuriousTomCat said:
You're all obsessed with 4k.

I'd much rather see developers concentrate their efforts on improving graphics and found better methods to remove jagged edges etc.
Click to expand...

For big displays 4K makes a HUGE difference. But don't worry, AA is a big field of research & plenty of resources get put into it. Tbh though SMAA 2TX pretty much solves it, but not many games have adopted it, it's mostly Cry-engine games or Nixxes (Tomb Raider, Deus Ex) that put it in. Something to look forward to:

 
As I sit so close to my monitor I clearly even see the difference between 1440p and 2160p. All depends on distance and I always like to be close to my monitor. Don't get how people enjoy sitting 4ft+ away from monitors.
 
Grim5 said:
Precisely. Everyone is on 4k screens
Click to expand...

Steam Hardware survey shows that 65% of people still game at 1080p
https://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey
10% at 768 laptop resolution
5% at 1440p
and 2% @ 4k

CuriousTomCat said:
You're all obsessed with 4k.

I'd much rather see developers concentrate their efforts on improving graphics and found better methods to remove jagged edges etc.
Click to expand...

Most of the graphics options within a game ARE there to make potato resolutions and low refresh look better with less jaggies. AA, Post processing, sharpening, blur etc.

When you get to 4k you can take out most of the settings that improve image quality for the lower most popular resolutions.

When we see reviews for gfx cards and lower fps for 4k resolutions - the only way to compare apples to apples is to turn every setting to max by the reviewers.

Some which just aren't needed at 4k and use up valuable processing power. At 4k you can turn off most of the rubbish settings in a game used enhance the most common potato resolutions, and free up the processing power of the GPU to render much higher frame rates than we see in reviews and get some very decent images and performance @ 4k.

All the graphical settings in a game have the numerous adjustments to cover poor hardware and low resolution right up to high end, high resolution and high refresh. If you get a game and turn up every setting to max at 1440p or greater....then you are doing it wrong.
 
Last edited:
Woodsta888 said:
Steam Hardware survey shows that 65% of people still game at 1080p
https://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey
10% at 768 laptop resolution
5% at 1440p
and 2% @ 4k



Most of the graphics options within a game ARE there to make potato resolutions and low refresh look better with less jaggies. AA, Post processing, sharpening, blur etc.

When you get to 4k you can take out most of the settings that improve image quality for the lower most popular resolutions.

When we see reviews for gfx cards and lower fps for 4k resolutions - the only way to compare apples to apples is to turn every setting to max by the reviewers.

Some which just aren't needed at 4k and use up valuable processing power. At 4k you can turn off most of the rubbish settings in a game used enhance the most common potato resolutions, and free up the processing power of the GPU to render much higher frame rates than we see in reviews and get some very decent images and performance @ 4k.

All the graphical settings in a game have the numerous adjustments to cover poor hardware and low resolution right up to high end, high resolution and high refresh. If you get a game and turn up every setting to max at 1440p or greater....then you are doing it wrong.
Click to expand...
Yep. As far as I am concerned any resolution below 2160p in 2020 = potato resolution :p:D
 
bigmike20vt said:
dunno about everyone but i am :) I have not used a proper monitor for gaming for about 15 years

I have a 70 inch 1080p screen and a 65 inch 4k screen and from 5 feet away the difference is significant.
Click to expand...
Thats really close for such big screens but the vast majority of people would not be able to tell the difference between 1440p and 4k at the distance they are sitting. Only talking about TVs and not monitors.
 
Woodsta888 said:
Steam Hardware survey shows that 65% of people still game at 1080p
https://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey
10% at 768 laptop resolution
5% at 1440p
and 2% @ 4k
Click to expand...

I said TV screens, no monitors. We're talking about consoles, most consoles are plugged into TV's and almost all TV's sold for the last few years now and only available in 4k and 8k resolution.

Living room TV's are well ahead of the curve - PC monitor market in general is up to 5 years lagging behind TV's, that's just the reality of it
 
Grim5 said:
I said TV screens, no monitors. We're talking about consoles, most consoles are plugged into TV's and almost all TV's sold for the last few years now and only available in 4k and 8k resolution.

Living room TV's are well ahead of the curve - PC monitor market in general is up to 5 years lagging behind TV's, that's just the reality of it
Click to expand...

No, You said 'screens'.

Living room TV's well ahead of the curve? Oh right, show me 144hz TV screen. Nearly all must have VRR too then do they. Show me a free sync TV. Only LG do OLED which everyone wants. But no TV yet will do 120hz at 4k do they? Only those LG's do 1440 x 120hz as TV's only have HDMI and not display port.

So I can get any TV and it'll have all the tech that monitors have then? And TV's have had this for 5 years? Input lag on TV's on par with monitors? The only thing TV's have got is OLED and I think still only LG make those panels.

Please show me some TV's that have image technologies similar to monitors. TV's been 4k for a while. Shame only really paid for content and a small amount of that is available in 4k for these TV's most people watch HD on 4k TV's.

I wondered where 4k8k got to.
 
Woodsta888 said:
No, You said 'screens'.

Living room TV's well ahead of the curve? Oh right, show me 144hz TV screen. Nearly all must have VRR too then do they. Show me a free sync TV. Only LG do OLED which everyone wants. But no TV yet will do 120hz at 4k do they? Only those LG's do 1440 x 120hz as TV's only have HDMI and not display port.

So I can get any TV and it'll have all the tech that monitors have then? And TV's have had this for 5 years? Input lag on TV's on par with monitors? The only thing TV's have got is OLED and I think still only LG make those panels.

Please show me some TV's that have image technologies similar to monitors. TV's been 4k for a while. Shame only really paid for content and a small amount of that is available in 4k for these TV's most people watch HD on 4k TV's.

I wondered where 4k8k got to.
Click to expand...

See my second post, I didn't update the first - there is another post I made two posts down that confirms TV screens.

The curve im referring to is that 90% of the TV market for sale today is either 4k or 8k - on PC 80% to 90% is 1080p with a bit of 1440p and a smidgen of 4k/5k/6k/8k. In 5 years that will change for PC. That's 5 years behind the curve.

TV's have had HDR 1000 nits 10 bit screens since 2016, PC monitors still can't even hit 1000 nits - but I think they will this year - that's 5 years behind the curve.

TV's have had OLED technology for a few years now, PC only just starting to get it.

Fair enough on input lag and VRR. TV's have only been comparable or better than PC in the last 2 years in this area. High end TV's now boast total latency lower than most PC gaming monitors and support Gsync/Freesync/VRR - there is a reason why some of those who can afford it have started swapping out their PC monitors for 4k 120hz Gsync OLED TV's / 4k 120hz Freesync QLED TV's, not to to show off but because it's actually better.
 
Last edited:
I quoted that post as did Th0nt for the same reasons. Doesn't matter anyway. I'm now more interested in these TV's 5 years ahead of monitors.

Please show me them. I wanna see what monitors will be getting in 5 years time. Cant think how I've missed them - I cant wait - wallet is ready. Show me

Right I see your edited post.

PC's dont get OLED. You've been able to plug in a PC into an OLED TV for as long as OLED has been about. The percentage of monitors available with 1000 nits from all monitors, is the same as the percentage of TV's available with 1000nits to all TV's.

Again not that much percentage of available content is in HDR much like 4k. 95% of TV is 1080 and SDR unless you pay for it. You may get the odd inclusive 4k content on Amazon such as altered carbon but the rest is extra.

Anyway - show me these TV's that are 5 years ahead in tech than monitors. I wanna buy one
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom