Soldato
lol!
-
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.
NVIDIA and AMD are both working toward 8K resolution, or 7680x4320
- Thread starter Boomstick777
- Start date
Caporegime
8x sli/xfire needed?
Planning on holding onto my 1440P screen until it dies, 4K capable cards will run 1440P with ease 
Man of Honour
it was 2 fps
http://www.extremetech.com/gaming/1...s-a-beautiful-glimpse-of-gaming-in-the-future
10 GTX Titans to get a playable rate LOL
If you don't run out of VRAM (which you would) 4 Titan Blacks would manage about 15 fps @8K lol. Unfortunately you will run out of VRAM and you will need something like 10 or 12gb per card to run it.
I wonder what the Maxwell Titan will have in the way of VRAM.
I'm at 7920x1440 and just use 100%, tried 125% and it doesn't look right. Never had an issue with reading anything at 100%
Caporegime
I can't help but feel that 8K would be wasted on our 27" screens. It really needs a bigger size to be viable.
Associate
Since 1440p is great at 27", 4K might just be about right at 30-32", 8K would need 60". I don't think my desk can handle that!
The Galaxy Note 4 fits 1440p into 5.7 inches, so if you work that up you should be able to squeeze 8k into a tiddler 17.1" screen
Plenty of room for that on your desk, though text in Windows might be a bit small to read!
Caporegime
8K would certainly make BF4 fun on a 100" plus size screen
Associate
Well yes, a little
Point stands though, pixel density at 27" is just about perfect with 1440p, much higher and the text would really get too small (Windows display scaling isn't great, application scaling even worse, and works particularly poorly across multiple screens of various resolutions). I wouldn't want 4K on 27" for that reason alone.
Caporegime
Well yes, a little
Point stands though, pixel density at 27" is just about perfect with 1440p, much higher and the text would really get too small (Windows display scaling isn't great, application scaling even worse, and works particularly poorly across multiple screens of various resolutions). I wouldn't want 4K on 27" for that reason alone.
I ran a 4K monitor and used res scaling for 150% on a 28" monitor and it was perfect on W8.1 Text was very sharp and not small but W7 not so great. Things like MSI AB I found hard to read the numbers but that was a minor gripe and getting close to the screen (eyes pressed against) sorted that.
Soldato
- Joined
- 27 Feb 2012
- Posts
- 6,586
For 8k, well...even 4k to be usable day to day on smaller 'normal' screen sizes Windows scaling needs to be better. I certainly don't agree with the people saying it'll be wasted on anything lower than *Enter random screen size here*
The phones people are using day in day out are running silly PPI, it'll be no different for monitors.
The phones people are using day in day out are running silly PPI, it'll be no different for monitors.
Man of Honour
I ran a 4K monitor and used res scaling for 150% on a 28" monitor and it was perfect on W8.1 Text was very sharp and not small but W7 not so great. Things like MSI AB I found hard to read the numbers but that was a minor gripe and getting close to the screen (eyes pressed against) sorted that.
4K
Win7
32" screen
The above works really well and no resolution scaling is needed.
Man of Honour
Soldato
Planning on holding onto my 1440P screen until it dies, 4K capable cards will run 1440P with ease
Same here. I hope to enjoy to knock on effect that 4K gaming has on 1440p.
8K would certainly make BF4 fun on a 100" plus size screen
I don't think anything can make BF4 fun