4k monitor - graphics hardware
- Thread starter Anton_
- Start date
Almost same for me. I use the Dynamic Super Resolution (DSR) 4x factor for my Nvidia 780Ti to render ED in 3960x2160 and downscale it to my native 1980x1080 resolution.
I've not checked FPS recently, but I have 4k running quite nicely with a R9 290 (but its still on stock cooling, noisy...) on max detail settings.
4k is very nice. Makes my 27" 2560 x 1440 at work (which is a better quality panel) look quite blocky, I keep wondering if the resolution has got messed up when I go in on a Monday.
Edit: iiyama 4k, £430, gfx £300??
4k is very nice. Makes my 27" 2560 x 1440 at work (which is a better quality panel) look quite blocky, I keep wondering if the resolution has got messed up when I go in on a Monday.
Edit: iiyama 4k, £430, gfx £300??
Last edited:
4K is the successor to the 2K resolution standard. 2K is otherwise known as Full HD or 1080p (1920x1080) and 4K doubles that to 3840x2160.
ED isn't that intensive so it should be ok. Other games will struggle though unless your using high end cards in SLI.
I wouldn't bother with 4k yet though tbh, it still needs work. The sub £700 4K screens are only TN panels, so the colours aren't great. Your better off with a 1440 VA/IPS screen if you want picture quality. Or go for a 120hz one, which are much nicer to game on
I wouldn't bother with 4k yet though tbh, it still needs work. The sub £700 4K screens are only TN panels, so the colours aren't great. Your better off with a 1440 VA/IPS screen if you want picture quality. Or go for a 120hz one, which are much nicer to game on
Last edited:
Thanks, looks like double the spec means double the price
4k on an Oculus is even more difficult but looks great
I was running 4k on a single 980 above 60 FPS, I have 2 of them, running them in SLI is overkill for this game
I use the Dynamic Super Resolution (DSR) 4x factor for my three Nvidia 660Ti in SLI to render ED in 3960x2160 and downscale it to my native 1980x1080 resolution on my 63 inch plasma, get 50 -140 fps. ( depending where I am ).
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
i7-3930k 4.2 GHz, 32 GB RAM, 3 X GeForce GTX 660Ti SLI, 512 GB SSD,
63' Plasma, 9.1 sound system, Saitek X55 Rhino HOTAS, water cooled.
View attachment 5990
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
i7-3930k 4.2 GHz, 32 GB RAM, 3 X GeForce GTX 660Ti SLI, 512 GB SSD,
63' Plasma, 9.1 sound system, Saitek X55 Rhino HOTAS, water cooled.
View attachment 5990
I really do not care for 4K as its out of date now. Remember in Japan they are already working on 8K screens so give it a year and we will all be saying, What's it like on an 8k screen...
Personally I run my Computer through my TV. Its a True HD 24" screen. Looks just as good as a monitor but when I get bord I can watch TV at the same time (top corner of screen)
I was going to get a Pent board and 3.0 G Card, I m not going to get a 4k monitor.
At maximum in game settings, certain areas (some stations, some asteroid fields during combat) will dip to fairly low frame rates (30s) at 4k, even with a 290X or GTX 980, but simply turning off blur and or AA will solve that.
A rather more common designation for what is more correctly refered to as a UHD (ultra-high definition) display.
i.e. a monitor with a native resolution of 3840x2160 pixels.
A rather more common designation for what is more correctly refered to as a UHD (ultra-high definition) display.
i.e. a monitor with a native resolution of 3840x2160 pixels.
Don't have a very beefy system myself. But I do know one thing, for 4k you need one hell of a fillrate. Which ironically is the one thing that hasn't gone through the roof in recent graphics hardware. It wouldn't surprise me if you found better results with lower end cards in SLI or crossfire, as that basically just doubles that number straight up, than with beefier single cards. In fact I'd say it's required.
I'd also say, 4k for the home is a waste. Go for a smaller resolution at a more reasonable price. 1440p is looking pretty attractive these days. In fact I'd say 1440p + 120hz is the gold medal, rather than 4k.
Really it's a bad time for new monitors as all the interesting stuff is just one generation away. Freesync and gsync is coming, affordable high resolution is coming, oled is coming. All very soon.
I'd also say, 4k for the home is a waste. Go for a smaller resolution at a more reasonable price. 1440p is looking pretty attractive these days. In fact I'd say 1440p + 120hz is the gold medal, rather than 4k.
Really it's a bad time for new monitors as all the interesting stuff is just one generation away. Freesync and gsync is coming, affordable high resolution is coming, oled is coming. All very soon.
I believe I gave you negative rep sir.. I apologise! I've not had my morning coffee! I hope the forum mods can rectify that, I'll ask them to do something about it! Apologies again.
Just to re-iterate on this point, there are many different marketing definitions of 'what is' and 'what isn't' when it comes to display resolutions. I prefer not to use marketing terms, as they can be very misleading.
Industry labels:
4096x2160 = 4K [17:9]
3840x2160 = UHD [16:9]
2560x1440 = WQHD [16:9]
2048x1080 = 2K [17:9]
1920x1080 = HD 1080 [16:9]
1280x720 = HD 720 [16:9]
What is described as a '2K' resolution is actually 2048 x 1080. Which is the true predecessor to 4K. Since they are both 17:9.
There's one very niche resolution missing from that list.. Actually two, very niche resolutions! The new LG 34" 21:9 display uses 3440 x 1440, which is still marketed as 'qHD' and the amazing single tile 5K display from Apple, which is a stunning 5120x2880. This is marketed as 'Retina 5K'.
Hold on.. This will clear everything up, lemme find.. This! A fairly comprehensive map of all of the known resolutions. Should help anyone who's confused.
Click Here - The image is massive!
What a tangent!
I use a single GTX Titan and game at 2560x1440. I'd love a 4K monitor, but I'm going to wait until the next iteration of GPUs is around. Hopefully they'll have enough grunt to run games at 60FPS, smoothly, at that crazy resolution.
Actually, instead of a 4K monitor, I want an LG monitor, as above. They are utterly stunning, especially in their 'Curved' variants. It's so large, with such a large aspect ratio that I think it needs to be curved. I think AOC is releasing one, relatively soon, which should be a lot cheaper than the LG equivalent, see below:
http://www.overclockers.co.uk/showproduct.php?prodid=MO-120-LG
http://www.overclockers.co.uk/showproduct.php?prodid=MO-125-LG&groupid=17&catid=2898
Last edited:
What's the field of view like at 4k on a single monitor? With 3 monitors it gets very distorted at the sides.
***lol***