4k 30 fps ultra settings

>4k 30 fps ultra settings
>4k 60 fps medium settings
>1440p 60 fps ultra settings
>1440p 144fps medium settings
>1080p 144fps ultra settings
Which would you pick and play with Sup Forums?

if i wanted to look at good visuals id go outside
and i dont think any game from before 2005 supports any of those options you've listed

144fps

what's the fucking point of this thread, absolute dogshit.

1080p 60fps ultra is enough

lower resolution ultra settings 60 fps
best of all 3 worlds

Is there any good pepe p*rn Sup Forumsros?

>4k 60fps
>High textures
>Medium shadows
>No AA

1080 ultra 144 for sure

Game with bad AA?
4k60 medium
Game with good AA?
1440p60 ultra
Game with good AA and good optimization (BF1)?
4k60 high-ultra

>1080p 60fps ultra is enough
Barely above being a consolepleb.

>4k medium
Why the hell would you want a higher resolution if you're gonna have to look at ugly graphics?

who cares

Because in most games there's barely a difference between medium and ultra.

Ask anyone who bought a PS4 pro or One X

>4k 144fps ultra settings
What are you? Poor?

Those games that show barely any difference between settings also barely increase/decrease fps between them.

who 720p medium/low 60 fps here?

Not true, some games can go from sub-60 FPS using ultra shadows to 80+ on high, with barely any difference in shadow quality.

go away brazil

>1024x786 9999+ fps minimal settings
me

you can kiss my white ass through my 250 k/bs internet connection mustafa

>1440p 60 fps ultra settings
From this list this is the best option. The best option period is this
>1440p 144fps ultra settings

640 x 480 25fps, as games are intended to be played

1080/60
final destination
anyone uprendering past that is falling for a meme, resolution =/= better graphics

graphical effects, more complex engines, more complex visuals > uprendering static assets from a console game that are all sub HD assets to begin with

1440p 60 fps ultra settings for singleplayer
1440p 144fps medium settings for multiplayer

4k 60fps is the best option, not 1440p 144fps. The jump between 1080 and 4k is far more substantial than the jump between 60fps and 144fps at any resolution.

4k 144fps on ultra because not a poorfag

p 144fps ultra settings
since i din't even have a 1080p monitor

specs?

lowest settings 30 fps master race

he must have one of those newfangled quantum computers

>mad that 900p 24fps isn't an option
you'll get that pc one day

lel

p 60 fps ultra settings

Nah probably has a 750ti but plays shit like quake3 or something.

1440p 144hz monitors outshine 4k@60hz, refresh rates are much more affordable and offer a greater view experience than 4k.

who cares

4k 30 Singleplayer, 1440 144 multiplayer.

1440p Ultra 120fps, just like I get now :^)

vidya game enthusiasts generally. who would have thought there would be some on Sup Forums though?

>4k 30 fps ultra settings
Would probably go with this for something turn based
>1440p 60 fps ultra settings
This for nearly everything else
>1440p 144fps medium settings
This for a handful of games that are super twitchy and benefit from the increased FPS for gameplay

cpu and gpu to get a 1440p 60fps on ultra?

if I spent that much money on a PC I'd probably just splurge out for 144hz 1440p

or better yet, 3440x1440 ultrawide and 100hz

i9 and 2 1080ti in SLi

People saying that 30 fps for single player and 144 for multiplayer what the fuck is your point? Are you actually that retarded that you do not see the visual difference between 30 and 144 fps and just want high fps because someone in esports told you that you need that to win?

1070+6700K gets me that on 99% of games. Better to just get the 8700k now though, 2 more cores and the same price.

>comparing 1440 to 2560
>suddenly compare 1080 to 2560
hmmm

what can i get with an i5/ryzen 5 and 1080/rx 580?

how am I supposed to sell you a new television, monitor, or video card? your factually correct opinions I agree with wholeheartedly are going to crash multiple industries you monster.

meant 1070

30 fps 240p medium settings

>Tfw soon 120fps will be the norm
>Tfw fags here will btich and call 60fps shit and unplayable.

>being such a brainlet that someone introducing another number into a discussion completely shuts off your ability to think
Hmmm

more like 1080p 60fps ultra on some games

Don't get an i5 with a 1080, if you mean 1070 then should be fine.

The third assuming the 60fps is stable, sounds like heaven. I'm lucky to get a consistent 60 on medium in most modern games at 720p with the garbage I'm working with.

>Tfw fags here will btich and call 60fps shit and unplayable.
Have you been living under a rock?

1080/60fps ultra/very high

1080p@240fps

>moving goalposts is fine when i argue
just making sure you're retarded and didn't just make a typo

yea, meant

I would think a videogame enthusiast would care
more about playing a game than looking at it

>tfw 8700k and 2x 1080ti
Feels good not being poor

Would you want to watch a movie on a 240p 3in screen or a 4k 72in OLED TV? That's why PC enthusiasts care. We can get higher image quality that consolekeks.

this may surprise you you can care about more than 1 thing at a time when you're not poor

1440p 144fps medium.
Unless medium has low draw distance
Then 1080p 144fps ultra, since draw distance is important.

>8700k
>all sold out near me or extremely marked up

bitcoin was a mistake, all these god damn faggots making miner machines and I just want to play video games.

1440p 60fps ultra

Confirmed worth. Lcd motion blur bugs the hell out of me in fast moving games.

>since draw distance is important.
Pop in is the bane of my existence

since when do CPUs matter for mining? I thought that shit was all about fucking up the GPU market.

The thread is about compromising though. Of course I would go for 4k ultra 144fps if I could.

4k/60 on a mix of medium/high is what I play most of my games at, so that one.

It's effecting the entire market.

Miners dont care about cpus. It's just intel paperlaunching it too early when they have 0 stock because they want to take away every sale they can this holiday season from Ryzen.

affecting*

4x4 supersampled 1080p 144fps ultra settings

16k Minecraft is enough

>not downsampling everything from 4k and just playing at 1080/144hz

8K HDR 144fps Ultra Settings

>1440p 144fps medium settings
Best. Ultra settings are a meme placebo.

Hows life in 2025?

>8K
>everyone must increase the font size 300% to read anything with 27in monitors

the future seems bleak.

ps9 is winning...*sniff*

So from these posts I'm getting 6600K with 1070 is just consolepleb tier?

currently enjoying 1080p 60FPS Ultra in muh rig

>AMD CPU for gayming
>8 gb ram in 2017

>pick
1440p 60 fps ultra settings
>play
1080p 60 fps ultra/high settings

But I don't feel like speding money for 144 fps or 4K in the near future

>$90 for 8gb of ram
2017 was a mistake, holy shit what a terrible time to build PCs.

Alright guys, I have an i7 4790k and a 980, and while I currently only play at 1080/144hz, I'm looking at stepping up to a 1440p/120hz screen. What are my options for a GPU upgrade? Should I just get a 1080ti and be done with it, or will a standard 1080 be worth it? Or should I just wait till next year when the 20 series is out and go with like a 2080ti and a 4k/60hz monitor?

Bitcoinshit is going to kill PC Gaming

p 144fps ultra settings
obviously

>needing more than 8

all that matters is how good the game is
i'd play 240p 10 fps if it means i get a damn good game

is my gpu bottlenecking me? :(

8GB was fine 3 years ago, but now 16 is the minimum. You are aware that system requirements increase with time, yes?

when consoles have 8GB of RAM, your PC should certainly have more than that.

Phones are starting to have that much RAM now you brainlet.

consoles dont have any vram though. the 8gb of ram is shared.