What graphical standard will people complain about once every

>he doesnt play at 12k 300fps
lmao 4klets when will they learn

Does it matter? That won't happen in your lifetime.

>>376295331
they'll complain that graphical advancements have stagnated.

The complaints will start getting directed towards sony/microsoft asking why new consoles don't look any better than previous ones.

You can already see this happening desu

>>376295331
Literally not happening. If you can make a 4K 30hz gaming system for cheaper and still sell it at the same price, that's exactly what you'll do.
And you can do that. Nobody but a niche enthusiast market gives a shit.

>>376295462
But 4k just came in recent years ago, its probably that in a few years another and better technology comes to replace 4k

>>376295331

8k 240fps. Having a 4k monitor I can confirm you can definiktely see higher than 4k.

I still don't understand 4k. I haven't seen a 4k display but is it really THAT much better than 1080?

>>376295539
>they'll complain that graphical advancements have stagnated.
I wish people stopped wishing hyper realistic graphics so developers could focus on actual good gameplay/story/elements that make games enjoyable and memorable/etc

>>376298195
Nope, you either reduce fidelity or scale to run it, conversely you can buy a 1080ti and hit 60fps stable with tweaks. Few 4k monitors support 144hz which may be a make or break for some. And depending on your actual screen's size and the distance you sit from it the returns diminish quickly. With that said an adequately sized monitor would benefit from it, most will not though, unless you're sitting inches away from it instead of the average 3'.

>>376295331
that "complaining" is how progress is made in technology, stop trying to stigmatize it. if everyone thought like you we would still be running nothing but 320x240 monitors if even that, probably nothing at all just because you faggots who think we are crazy would just say "who needs computers, we have pencils and paper?" or maybe even "who needs paper, we have stone!!!!" fuck you faggots, this is why white people formed the world

>>376295825
No, it won't.
Next generation cards will already have a hard time running 4k.
Processors are reaching the manufacturing hard limit for transistors in only a few generations.

>>376299001
what will stop cpu manufacturers from eventually opting to make their chips physically bigger to accommodate for more?

>>376298195
Even 1440p aka 2k is a massive step up from 1080p, not necessarily so much in games (depends on the game desu, what textures are like etc) but at least for productivity, Web browsing... Yeah its a huge difference

File: cxl_screenshot_paleto bay_81 (1).jpg (172KB, 1600x900px) Image search: [Google]

172KB, 1600x900px

there's a limit to how much human can perceive without it becoming redundant
i think 8k is where we reach the limits before things straight out look like real life

>>376299110
What's the largest piece of technology you own?
Probably a car.
A car is expensive because it requires a lot of resources to manufacture, ship and maintain.
Price is the reason and accessibility.
Devs won't make video games in the quantity they do now if they can only reach .001% of a select luxury market.
Although I can see everyone owning a "PC closet" some time in the far future. That is if they don't discover some revolutionary way to deal with the heat problems before that.

>>376299340
a current chip is the size of my fucking thumb, i don't see why on earth it can't be any bigger than that without making it ridiculously big or expensive, and similarly there are options such as multiple cpus on a single motherboard and sli. eventually there will be enough demand to make better chips just as there are today and there is always going to be the option to make it all bigger

File: image.jpg (25KB, 480x360px) Image search: [Google]

25KB, 480x360px

>>376295331
Fuckers here are already saying stuff like "locked 60fps 1080" when a console can do it now. It will be followed by the words "completly unplayable" soon no doubt. I hate this place.

>>376299502
As said, the problem is not size, but heating.
Put them close together and they overheat.
Also a collection of processors can not be used the same way as one more powerful processor.
Distance matters at the microscopic scale, meaning they can't be used in tandem for the same task.
There's workarounds but you'll very likely never see the boom of boost in performance you saw for the past decades.

>>376295331
4k is so fucking stupid. The power needed for that could be used for better lighting, higher res textures, better AA/AF or simply just better framerates. This would result in much higher fidelity gains than 4k but noo, those aren't marketable, resolutions are! And of-fucking-course it's consoles that are pushing that bullshit forward. Who knew?

>>376299867
but a cpu that can run 4k at 60 fps or more would be able to run better shaders and whatnot at 1080p

>>376299001
The hard limit for silicone, there are alternatives to be made when we get to that point. GPUs are still some ways away from encountering any tunneling issues. I also don't know if I agree with your stance that the next generation will fail to produce substantially better results given the 1080ti handles 4k reasonably well.

>>376299220
It depends more upon how close your fovea is to the screen. If you're familiar with pointillism or other impressionist methods the same concept applies. There is no set resolution like there is no set framerate for the eyes.

720/1080 were both substantial improvements because people were upgrading to much larger sets than the 480 resolution was intended for which probably has a clear scale of 24" diagonal on a CRT, on your standard LCD it's probably 20" max due to the method of projection and the sharpness. 720p is effective up to 32" or better even. 1080p can probably push upwards of 42" clearly. Of course this is all assuming you're sitting 9' away from the TV, as the average person does.

Monitors are a whole other ballgame, though since the average user has their monitor within 3' during use. The proximity is counterbalanced by the size of the screen, which with special exception is almost always smaller than a TV, and as such the pixel density is well within the boundaries of acceptable perception of performance at 1080p, though benefits can be gained by increasing it to 1440p with larger monitors.

>>376299867
It really depends on the user

A casul console babby who plays vidya on his 42' TV will see massive difference in 4K

Said casuls spend a lot of money to get their yearly CoD or football release

you know how it goes

>>376299985
That's not what they're developing for though, they want to push the resolution gimmick.

>>376299502
As you scale up chips, you fit less of them on a wafer and at the same time increase chance of defects through impurities in the substrate. Bigger chips are massively more expensive because of that.
Nvidia Fermi was a good example of a, for the time, massive chip design. Yields were catastrophically bad.

>>376300130
>The hard limit for silicone
That's what I meant by manufacturing hard limit. To say they'll switch to a whole new process and it won't be ridiculously expensive is wishful thinking.
And you're wrong about GPU's.
They've increased in size substantially over time and been pushing SLI like crazy because of the lack of improvement. It's not just quantum tunneling. The main bad guy in the design process is heat, it's hard to reach quantum tunneling limits if your processor melts in seconds.

File: 1471589060162.jpg (57KB, 540x540px) Image search: [Google]

57KB, 540x540px

>>376298298
That would actually require effort.

>>376295331
8k screens are coming out, so it will be 8k 144fps despite serious diminishing returns in visual fidelity at the massive cost of bandwidth output.
I normally try and avoid hyperbole but I cannot fathom how they are going to sell those panels to normals.

File: rainy street.gif (499KB, 500x281px) Image search: [Google]

499KB, 500x281px

>average user
>playing at 144hz @ 4K

Indie pixel garbage, maybe. AAA games are made for consoles first and ported to PC second and you simply can't just make a game designed around 30FPS suddenly run at 144+ and expect things to just work. Companies will continue to push higher resolutions and shinier graphics rather than high framerates.

At the end of the day you still have to ask yourself, is there a single game currently out on the market that would justify buying a rig capable of running it at those specs and the answer is an easy no.

>>376300501
>At the end of the day you still have to ask yourself, is there a single game currently out on the market that would justify buying a rig capable of running it at those specs and the answer is an easy no.

It wont stop the rich fucks with mountains of disposable income to slap their speccy dicks all over your face any chance they get.