The only gpu capable of 1440p 144hz gaming costs 1200 dollars

>the only gpu capable of 1440p 144hz gaming costs 1200 dollars.

4k gaming with a decent frame rate isn't going to happen for another decade.

> 1440p 144hz is difficult to pull off
> therefore 4k 60kz is even more difficult
look everyone, a retard.

I play modern games at 1080p on medium-high settings at like 30-40 fps and I'm happy

4k is a meme right now, it can happen but the stars have to align straight into an unpozzed neggyhole in sweden on a leyline

>1200 dollars

You can get a 1080 for less than 600

>4k televisions are out
>tv still broadcasts in 720
>4k blu rays come in select regions at a slow trickle (seems like Germany gets most of them?) and PS4/PS4 Pro/Xbox One/Xbox One S can't even play them anyway
>current gen consoles can't even keep steady 1080p half the time
>netflix 4k content**
**compressed

It was clearly introduced too early who is buying this shit?

>Not just getting a Gysnc/Freesync monitor and enjoying perfectly smooth 1440p at whatever framerate it manages.

>who is buying this shit
Good question, honestly. What can you even watch on a 4k screen right now?

4k gaming won't probably be commonplace until another decade.

I settled for 1440p 75hz because anything above that I just get diminishing returns. After emulating Gamecube games in HD I realized that we still haven't progressed far enough in graphical fidelity for me to care about higher resolutions.

Xbox One S can play 4k blu-rays

I play at 4k 30+ fps on mid setting
I don't care much about graphics or AAA dogshit

uninformed people who think TV broadcasts at the highest resolution. Every time I told someone that TV broadcasts at 720p they did not believe me at all.

But you know what they say A Fool and His Money Are Soon Parted

woah, nobody cares about meme fps or shiny graphics

ofc you can play at 1440p 144hz
just drop the graphics settings from ultra high to medium

>it can happen but the stars have to align straight into an unpozzed neggyhole in sweden on a leyline
Nice one, Australia.

Says who?

For reference here's Soul Calibur 2 running at 60 FPS at 1440p downsampled from 5K and it still looks and plays like a dream.

I wouldn't be so pessimistic, look at how far gpu performance has grown in just 4 years.

Also the difference between "HD" and resolutions much higher than that (mind you, 2160p is already 9 times higher than 720p) is like night and day. I can understand how the difference wouldn't be too distinct or even useful on a gamecube game, though.

So maybe nvdias next architecture will have stable 4k gaming?

You also forgot that most 4k Blu-rays are of movies that are upscaled from their 2K digital masters.

Considering nearly every game out there can be ran at 4K and 60fps on a single GPU, the answer is a most definite yes. The amount of games that wouldn't reach 60fps for whatever reasons can probably be counted with the fingers on your hands.
And keep in mind less demanding current games and all "last-gen" games could run at 4K60 even before Pascal.

>Mfw SC2 Link still looks better than any of the Links from the mainline series
>Mfw SC2 still looks better than BotW on the Switch

>60
>decent

does freesync/gsync make lower fps look better, too? is it actually noticeable?

it just removes screen tearing without the stutter/input lag vsync can cause

It basically eliminates screen tearing by tieing your monitor's refresh rate to the frame rate your system outputs, so yes, it makes lower fps and dips a more enjoyable experience.
However there is a downside to the technology, in that if you're hitting, say, around 30fps on average your monitor's refresh rate will in that case be 30Hz. This is very unpleasant and straining to the eye.

1080ti should be alright for 4k.

Incorrect.
4k gaming will be full blown in 2023.

Vega will be up for the task

>I'm autistic and don't even play video games
that's all you needed to say op

inst that why most monitors specify freesync/gsync range above 48 Hz?