Soldato
- Joined
- 10 Nov 2006
- Posts
- 8,578
- Location
- Lincolnshire
I wouldn't, I'd be throwing up in a bucket
-
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.
Is 4k monitor resolution even worth it yet?
- Thread starter Cromulent
- Start date
Associate
- Joined
- 30 Aug 2015
- Posts
- 288
Textures and AA but waht about lighting effects etc..
I love people who go 4 k then play at medium
I would rather play 1080p @ ultra tbh.
4K at medium is better than 1080 ultra IMO, not even close either.
Hold on he says IMO (in my opinion) so just how is that rubbish, you may not agree with it in your opinion, but that doesn't make his opinion BS as you put it.
I agree with blues. 1080 is crazy low res next to 4k and it really does show. Now 1440 at ultra, that's the sweetspot now tbh -- doable on a single gpu and looks very nice, a significant jump from 4k med and definitely 1000x better than 1080 ultra.
I really want the new 4k 43" phillips coming out in the next month or so. But i know ill regret it if i cant play all my games at high to max settings with good fps. But i only got my lg 34" super wide monitor last year which i love, so ill hold off until a single gpu comes out that play 4k at my requirements.
then theres something wrong with you lol, i was playing division at 15-22fps before i bothered to put my 270x in which was like a week plus after purchase(10th of march as was a b'day present, the game i got 2 days later) and only had reasonable stutter, but not enough to make it non playable and get me killed.
I have to agree with this.
Soldato
- Joined
- 10 Nov 2006
- Posts
- 8,578
- Location
- Lincolnshire
You can't polish an old ****.
It's the motion sickness that chugging along at 15/30fps gives me, never used to effect me but since I have gotten older it's a big problem, I couldn't care less what FPS games run at, if it's silky smooth at 45fps like The Division it doesn't effect me.
I find below 35fps Gsync stops helping and games become choppy again.
I tend to agree'd with the above 4k isn't really a gaming thing, at least atm for the next couple of years. Now 4k on my Surface pro or tablet looks lovely, wouldn't be without it.
Gaming at 4k was nice. I'd never have dropped to standard 1440p for my gaming needs - I only dropped because Ultrawide is simply a better aspect ratio for gaming so 1440 UW was my only option. I did notice a drop in .. crispness? mmm.. sharpness is probably a better word - but the iq definitely dropped. Luckily the aspect ratio and freesync more than made up for the iq drop.
Soldato
- Joined
- 10 Nov 2006
- Posts
- 8,578
- Location
- Lincolnshire
On the other hand forgetting the "sharpness" for a moment going from a TN 4k panel to a IPS UW was just as good to me, everything looked black and white on the TN in comparison.
I've been gaming at 4K for two years now. I started with a 780 Ti and could play then-modern games like Tomb Raider at medium/high settings. A single Titan X / 980 Ti is more than enough for many games. I now have two TXs and expect to be skipping this generation of GPUs and possibly the next.
That said, now is not the time to buy a 4K monitor for gaming. You should wait until 4K monitors with Displayport 1.3, high refresh, and variable sync become available, as well as graphics cards to drive them. The acme for me would be a 21:9 5040 x 2160 monitor.
*drool*