Wtf! i hate 4k now

wtf! i hate 4k now

Other urls found in this thread:

referencehometheater.com/2013/commentary/4k-calculator/
youtube.com/watch?v=tbGT-u4i3EY&
twitter.com/NSFWRedditVideo

4K is a meme.

>german
go back to your third-world country

60fps is a meme
The Witcher 3 is the biggest meme of them all

I would rather have 1080p/60 over 4K.

>x is a meme
okay, I haven't been here since 2011. What is this? Why do I keep seeing it? What does that even mean?

GOTTA SEE ALL THOSE HAIRS ON SOMEONES ARM

Is Witcher 3 the next Crysis?

In this context a thing that is often hyped but, but useless in practice.

4k is a meme in the sense that getting playable framerates at the resolution is difficult, requiring expensive GPU hardware or sacrificing texture/AA/draw distance.

You are usually better off just playing at 1080p or 1440p even if you have a 4k monitor.

well yeah, no shit, it's 4k, it's going to take a long time to become consumer-viable. Why does that make it a meme?

Is Witcher3 still the go-to benchmark game?
It's been a year already, shouldn't we have some better game with hotter grafix?

It's basically used as a way to invalidate anything the person wants.
Someone literally said that 'Fun is a meme,' on this board. It's just more shitposting.

> shouldn't we have some better game with hotter grafix?
Sure. You make it, user, go ahead. Spend millions in increased asset generation for a benefit that only 2% of the people who buy your game will even see.

The fact that we can already run a game like TW3 at 4K/60FPS makes me feel really good
In a couple of years that Titan X performance will be available in mid-range cards and god fucking dammit I can't wait.

All the newer ones with good graphics run better on AMD cards

>4k

GSync 144h 1440p and supersampling is all you need. The "you can't see different between upscaled and native 1080p from five feet away" was a meme, this is legit, you really cannot see the amount of detail 4k brings over 1440p unless you look up close and not in motion.

>you really cannot see the amount of detail 4k brings over 1440p unless you look up close and not in motion.
if you sit closer than 5ft from your monitor, you can see it.
referencehometheater.com/2013/commentary/4k-calculator/

144hz is the biggest meme though. Anyone can notice the difference between 1080p and 4k, but barely anyone in here could tell the difference between 60 and 144fps

Freesync 2

Expanded color space is the future my famalam

There are a few games that look pretty good but are less demanding. Gears of War 4 and DOOm look and run great. Rise of the Tomb Raider as well. Deus Ex Mankind Divided is pretty performance intensive maxed out. Also Quantum Break has a very good lighting system, although the PC launch was such a disaster everyone forgot about the game.

pcucks BTFO

you'd understand after getting a 4k monitor and running some games
1440p at 60fps with AA turn on and all that is better than trying for 4k
There's limited returns with resolution, and you're always better off going for framerate

You really can after a while of using 144. I didn't believe it either even after I got my new monitor and after a week or so of using it I tried how it feels to go back to 60 and oh boy was it blurry

i don't even have a 1080p monitor, i don't give a shit about visuals i just like fun games

1440p 144hz > 4k 60hz

Basically. I'm sure 4K will be nice but until it's more affordable I'll stick with 1080. The jump between 720 to 1080 is a lot more worth caring about than the jump from that to 4k.

>barely anyone in here could tell the difference between 60 and 144fps

You can easily see the difference between 60fps and 144fps.

Between 80fps and 144fps some people genuinely cannot see the difference but most can if they strain hard enough, between 100fps and 144fps almost no one can tell the difference.

My source: double-blind tests

difference between 144hz and 60hz is 2ms of delay
you got meme'd, son

hmmm you don't know what the words you type mean

It's not even just the fps. It's the reduced motion blur from everything you do like scrolling and moving windows around. It's just amazing and I honestly hate regular 60hz monitors. I will never buy a monitor less than 120hz

>Rise of The Tomb Raider
>Running well
Nice meme.

Top kek, 0/1 troll, you're not even trying you just sound like a dumb kid

Everything is a meme
Google the definition

Works on my machine :^)

But anyway, I have an i5 6600k and GTX 980, can easily max out the game at 1080p/60 except for textures which require more than 4GB of VRAM. Game runs fantastic except for the Geothermal Valley which can be kinda demanding but it's not too bad. Aside from that hub area it's one of the best optimized AAA games this year, aside from Gears 4 and DOOM which run on magic or something.

It doesn't mean anything, underage retards use it as an argument because they lack the proper vocabulary to make anyone understand what they're actually trying to say.

Okay. That's 1080p, barely getting 60fps with a 980? Lol that's fucking awful.
I have i7-4790K @4.8Ghz
GTX 1080 AMP Extreme
I can barely get 90 fps on 1440p and it sucks. I notice it, my 144hz isn't being utilized enough. I should be getting easily over 100.

No, it's poorly optimized especially in many snowy areas and yes geothermal Valley. DX12 made it worse, it looks nicer but who cares, you can't even use fucking steam overlay with DX12 enabled.

>use 4K monitor/TV
>crank every setting in an already demanding game

What a retard.

People would be surprised how much you can do at 1440p and 4K with a mediocre card and slacked settings. Most effects are shitty fake camera emulation like lens flares and excessive bloom anyway

>I notice it, my 144hz isn't being utilized enough.
You fell for the 144Hz meme. Almost zero AAA games besides Battlefield 1 can get 1440p/144fps, your CPU will get bottlenecked too easily. Modern CPU's simply aren't fast enough to keep up with high-end GPUs.
youtube.com/watch?v=tbGT-u4i3EY&
Even with an i7/Titan XP at 1080p you can't get a stable 144fps in most games. It has less to do with optimization and more to do with the fact CPU's have stopped improving significantly.

BF1 shits on my i5 4690k@4,4 when playing on a 60hz, you must have a beastly cpu to play it at 144 hz

Oh, I don't own it, I just saw benchmarks. Maybe the multi is more demanding than the single player which is what most people used for benchmarking.

What gpu are you using? I've got the same cpu at the same OC and I probably average 80-100fps in firefights. I'm using a gtx1080 and playing at 1440p. My cpu is definately the bottleneck, but I'm finding it hard to justify spending $400-600 on a new CPU for like 10ish fps.

>Doesn't have a 1080p monitor so he doesn't know games get more fun and more immersive at higher refresh rates/resolutions
I feel bad for you

>maximum details

well no shit it barely reaches 60 fps

Yeah, the mp is severely more demanding
It's a pretty mediocre, slightly OC'd r9 280. I'm playing at lower settings to compensate- the gpu is now sitting below max load, while the cpu is at ~90% and caps out in specific situations. I'm currently capping the fps at 75 via console commands, which seems to help a bit with large fps variance leading to feelings of sluggishness, and it tends to stay there most of the time, but on some maps it drops to the 60's, sometimes even to 55
Multiplayer, of course, SP is much less demanding cpu-wise, there's 63 less players running around after all

Something continually repeated. A lot of companies like to talk about reaching 1080 or 4k resolutions as well as 60 FPS. It's a bit like how digital cameras used to be all about which one had the highest megapixels

That's pretty much it, no matter how good the hardware gets the games will become more demanding causing you still to end up with using full HD for playable framer ates and everything else maxed out.

Hardware performance is barely incremental now, you're never going to have 8K at 140fps or whatever, not even if you throw money at manufacturers. Face it, this is the plateau and there won't be a revolutionary new architecture to break it.

>maximum details
not a relevant benchmark. Even midrange cards can do playable 4k. If you buy a new monitor that's not 4k you are fucking retarded.

fpbp

At this point, 4K is still not going to be relevant for gaming for a while yet.

It's largely developer's faults. They aren't targeting 4k but instead whatever shit consoles use. They need to tone back the graphics dial if we are to ever play at 4k 60 on average GPUs.

As someone who owns a 1440p monitor and a 4K monitor, I can tell you 4K at 60fps with AA is a lot nicer than 1440p.

when I had a 390 and a 4690k, that piece of shit game was practically broken and I got bellow 60fps even if I put everything on lowest

and yes I had proper drivers, a clean windows install and everything else worked fine

also it's 2017 now

>4K
>VR
>HDR
Things nobody cares about but for some reason sony and other retards spend time and money developing this shit.

>bellow

I meant below

I'd like 4k for non-gaming shit, watching something like Planet Earth in 4k would be fantastic. Saying 4k is a meme is like saying 1080 was a meme back when everything was 1024/600.

It's a meme right now but these actually will be viable in the future.

It is a meme currently because of how demanding it is. It's gr8 but no one can run it

Hardware performance is barely incremental because there's no competition. AMD is the sole competitor of Nvidia and Intel and they barely stay afloat. All Nvidia and Intel ever need to do is release products that are just better than AMD's shit and they're guaranteed a monopoly. If AMD or someone else becomes a solid competitor and actually starts beating them when they pull that shit, then I guarantee we'll start seeing larger increases.

I'm so sorry but I think what you meant to say is
"no-one can run the most recent demanding AA titles maxed out past 60fps except people with a multi-GPU setup or titanxp.
You disingenuos twat.

I think people will accept 4k when it becomes as accessible as 1080p but not because it would be such a drastic difference in image quality, but because why not if the price is the same.

You have to have a ultra high end computer to run at 60 fps as far as I know.

Even the Pro with its toaster Jaguar and RX 470 can get 2160p/60 in less demanding games like sports shit.in graphics intensive games just turn the settings down. A 1070 can be a 4k card if you want it to be, and if you mainly play older or less demanding stuff the 1060 and 480 are great as well.

I'm so sorry, I think you messed up again! What you meant to say is:
"You have to have an ultra high end computer to max out the most demanding shit on the market at 4K and get over 60fps"

Come the fuck on, there's a billion games out there you could run just fine at 4K60fps on a mid-range machine, but you choose to look at the select AA titles that require shitton of performance to max out and/or are shittily optimised as well, and then go and spout shit that translates to "no game can be ran at 4K60 without an ultra high end machine".

Now do see the slight issue with what you're claiming here?

>1070 can be a 4k card

>very high detail

Reminder that high or even medium settings 4k looks miles better than very high detail FHD or QHD.
Anyone who says otherwise has never used a 4k monitor.