12K IS THE NEW 4K

>>382313573
>180+ licensed cars from iconic manufacturers
>Tested and tuned by pro racing drivers
>Class-leading Esport capabilities
How the fuck are these features?

>>382313573

Who fucking cares anymore. Nobody can tell the difference between 1080p and 4k anyway.

This will be just another meme to separate you from your money.

>>382313573
even before 12K we had 8K resolutions

>>382314014
>Nobody can tell the difference between 1080p and 4k anyway

>what poorfags tell themselves
o im laffin

>>382313573
only problem with 4k screens is that they cost about as much as a cheap car

>>382314014
I'm guessing you don't have a 4K TV, and/or a PC that can run it. There is an absolute noticeable difference.

>>382314014
I love it when jews and/or poor people rationalize things like this

>>382314195
I bought a Samsung 55-inch 4K/HDR TV last Black Friday for 700 bucks.

I already think 4k is too much.
I notice the difference and all that but resolution is the least of anyone's problems. Better textures, better shading, lighting effects and framerate are tons of times more important than resolution.
12k seems like a huge waste of money right now.

File: 1494204482981.jpg (26KB, 479x358px) Image search: [Google]

26KB, 479x358px

I'm still kinda new to this shit, would you really be able to notice 12K over 4K?

>>382313573

8k is pretty much the limit for the human eye to perceive pixels, once we get that, it's about frame rates.

>>382314315

Non-HDR is even cheaper, it's great.

>>382314195

My 4K monitor cost £400 a couple of years ago and I have a 50inch 4K TV that cost £500, they are not monstrously expensive at all, a 144hz 4K monitor when available will be though.

>>382314270
>>382314183

Actually I'm not poor because I don't buy this shit. I'm sure poverty looks better in 12k tho.

I'll take being called a Jew over acting like a nigger.

>>382314351

At 3X the pixel density yes of course you would.

>>382314329
>12k


12k was put on that Intel slde because Intel marketing is ABYSMAL . They mean 3 4k monitors . To a retard or a marketer, 3*4k must equal 12k .

/Thread

>>382314509

That's not what 12K support means retard, it means when you go to select your resolution it's not capped at 4K it can go all the way to 12K, not that anything can run it at the moment but it shows how consoles make a little jump then PCs make a massive leap.

>>382314481
>has to penny-pinch
>not poor
kek
fuck off white trash

>>382314582
It's okay to be wrong .

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=VNIllzt213Y

>>382314351
Depends on how far away you are and the size of the screen. Pixels per Degree

>>382313573
If you are a competent dev you can develop for 1000000000k because everything should be scalable, pointing this out as a feature is pretty sad like you don't have anything else to boast about.

wasn't there a game that had a bug that made you able to choose a 40k resolution?

>>382314183
Honestly I can't tell difference between 1080p and 720p. With 8x AA 720p usually even looks better in dynamic than 1080p without AA.

>>382314704

This has absolutely nothing to do with the game posted in the OP? Are you seriously retarded?

>>382314014
the only people who hold this viewpoint are ones who have never used a real 4K display

>>382315059

Watch a 720p rip of a movie and a 1080p rip of a movie then come back and tell us you can't tell the difference. You're playing the wrong games kiddo.

>>382314351
In most situations, almost certainly not.
Not enough of a difference to justify how much it would cost you to render something in real time at that resolution, at least, much less the cost of a display that could show it.

>>382315120
Maybe you're right. I don't watch movies unfortunately, and for games good AA>resolution

>>382315215
Downsampling is the best AA

File: IMG_0307.jpg (221KB, 640x800px) Image search: [Google]

221KB, 640x800px

>>382314701

Hahahaha, shitskin confirmed. Enjoy poverty, Jamal.

Seriously though, try saving money every week and not spending it ever, it will change your life.

>>382315106
I still feel the same way about 720p vs 1080p despite owning both for nearly 10 years. It's a lot like cars - it's the marketing that makes it feel awesome, the reimagining of yourself as whoever is the type of person that buys it rather than who you really are - once you see through the bullshit you can evaluate whether it suits your needs.

>>382315215
There's no better AA than increased resolution friendo. You have no idea what you're talking about

>>382315357
Or mabe you're just a turbojew who's neck deep into rationalizing to justify his jewishness
I know because I am also a jew and have to convince myself to spend money on my hobby because cheaping out on the thing you do for 5 hours a day is aisine stupidity
You'll learn eventually

>>382315429
Completely wrong. Jaggies and grainy textures are still jaggies and grainy textures at 4K. Supersampled 1080p>4K

>>382313573
>So console players are boasting about finally being able to achieve 30FPS at 4K.
If you're talking about the crash remake, it runs at 1440p on the PS4pro, so not really.

>>382315457

Son, my real hobby is making money - I get to do it 8-10 hours a day. Vidya is about blowing off steam.

I will take high framerate (90fps+) 144hz 1080p with enhanced colours (in particular reds), maxed out settings, and freesync anyday over 30fps 4K on medium to low settings.

Fact is we dont really have the hardware to make 4K worthwhile yet. Consoles are going to have a hacky way of technically achieving it but cheating (like many older HDTVs were "HD Ready" 720p upscalers) Probably got a good few years to get out of 1080p still.

The quality of the image being outputted by the device is equally important.

>>382315539
Having native 4k has the same effect as downsampling from 4k. It's pretty obvious that you've never owned or seen a 4k display

>>382315738
Wrong. You have no idea how antialiasing works.

>Majority of the world doesnt even use 1080p yet
>DUDE 12K LMAO

This was all a mistake

>>382313573
Normal GPUs already struggle at 4k in decent resolutions, I don't see 12k any time soon.

>>382313573
>1080p resolutions hurt my eyes
>4K absolutelly kills my eyes

having sensitive eyes is suffering

also
>unable to play FFXV because the menus and UI have this fucking tiny font on them that I cant read anything without hurting my eyes

>>382313573

>All these fucking meme resolutions
>Trying to force me to upgrade my GPU

Haha won't work you faggots. The fact people are trying to play at 4K just means that 1080/6-fps is easily achievable on mid-range cards.

I could not care less about 4K on a 24" fucking monitor.

File: Custom_Resolution2.jpg (123KB, 508x490px) Image search: [Google]

123KB, 508x490px

>>382315958
>resolutions were a mistake

No you monkeys who don't understand technology and fall for marketing hype were a mistake.
Customizing reolution was a thing since the dawn of computers, only limited by the native screen resolution and computng power.
You can play 20 years old 3D games in 12k right NOW if you want.

>>382316214
if you don't have at least 1440p by now, you're literally welfare tier.

File: 1493105212370.jpg (209KB, 720x960px) Image search: [Google]

209KB, 720x960px

>>382314014
>>382315059

I have a 2560x1440 display and I could immediately tell the difference between it a 1920x1080 display. You must be visually challenged.

>>382315840
Supersampling is literally running the game at a higher resolution and scaling it down to a display with lower pixel density. Aliasing occurs because pixel density isn't high enough to display smooth lines and curves. A 4k screen has a much higher pixel density than a 1080p display. The only reason why native 4k would look different than supersampled 4k is if the 4k display is vastly bigger than the 1080p display which isn't an issue with regular computer monitors

File: spaghetti.jpg (338KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

338KB, 1280x720px

>>382314450

There's already quality 4k HDR 120hz monitors and yes they are quite expensive. But glorious, true HDR at 4k is indeed the new frontier.

>>382315618

Plenty of games run at 60fps maxed on 4K on a 1080ti, not all of them but quite a few do.

>>382313573
>Meanwhile PC gamers literally can't buy GPUs. *

>>382313573
yeah, too bad there arent 12k monitors and 1080 support only up to 8k

>>382316568

Show me one, as far as I know they release this quarter but none are out yet and they will be $2K or something.

>>382316640

Maybe where you live, in Britain all the online stores have the top tier Nvidia cards in stock.

>>382315958

Majority of the world has brown eyes too doesn't mean that they aren't shit tier.

File: You.jpg (1MB, 2066x3338px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2066x3338px

>>382316795

Brown eyes are actually master race when it comes to evolutionary traits. Now in terms of rarity yes they are devalued but if everyone in the world had blue eyes you'd bet your ass the few with brown eyes would be revered due the brain's bias to scarcity.

>>382316640
Cryptocurrency fags don't want the 1080s so anyone who cares about resolution isn't affected

>>382317116

Just because something is dominant in an hereditary context does not make it master race at all, may genetic deformities are dominant, down syndrome is dominant, does not make it master race.

>>382314392
Yeah, I'm sure non-HDR is pretty good too. Honestly, the only one I've definitely noticed a major difference with as far as HDR goes is Horizon Zero Dawn.

File: chris.webm (3MB, 960x538px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 960x538px

>>382317262

I actually agree with you, maybe that's easier to identify when you notice I never said otherwise.

File: optimal-viewing-distance-television-graph-size.png (49KB, 547x461px) Image search: [Google]

49KB, 547x461px

>>382314392
>8k is pretty much the limit for the human eye to perceive pixels

No, thats entirely dependent on the size of screen and your distance to it.

If you had a 1080p screen the size of a postage stamp, it would look clearer than a 4k image blown up to a screen the size of a building.

>>382314014
There are diminishing returns, but that doesn't mean you can't tell a difference. I can imagine it'll be hard to tell the difference between 4K and 12K, though.

>buying into anything above 1080p
Are you retarded?

Ah well, it ain't my money...

>>382317830
>Having terrible eyesight

>>382317497
You don't know how long I've been searching for a chart like that!

>>382317830

Right now that's the same as someone saying not to bother going above a PS2 five years after the PS3 was released.

>>382317954
Processing power is not the same as resolution, dumbass. In fact, I sometimes question wether it wouls be better if HD consoles had kept their performance but stuck to SD resolutions. It would have definitely given an increase in performance with almost no noticable difference in graphical fideliy.

>>382317915
Retard

>>382317497
It looks like 4k will be the cap for regular dektop screens from this chart.
Going above 30" is kind of pointless as it all becomes peripheral vision.
For VR screens it's a different story.

Serious question, do people actually care about 4k? Perhaps i will be blown away the moment i see a game running in 4k but higher resolution than 1080p is just not something that keeps me up at night. I don't see my friends talking about 4k and we all mainly play on pc. 4K seems like a push to sell new hardware and force us to keep upgrading our machines for the next 10-20 years and i am skeptical about it.

>>382318301
You've got it right. 4K, HDR, 3D, VR, it's all a fucking scam.

File: 1497243449103.png (405KB, 905x825px) Image search: [Google]

405KB, 905x825px

>4k
>30hz

File: 1497969345280.png (83KB, 510x546px) Image search: [Google]

83KB, 510x546px

>>382313573
>It's this fucking thread again.
I still game at 480p on my consoles and 720p on my PC.
If your game is shit, no amount of graphics will save it.
If your game is great, good graphics will improve the experience, but the art direction and art consistency is more important than technical shit like AA, resolution, tesselation etc.

>>382318435
YAMERO

>>382318075

It was a comparison dumbass, PS2 graphics being far worse than PS3 graphics 5 years after release.

>>382318301

Watching a 2160p movie rip really blew me away the first time I watched one, it was the new Evil Dead movie and I couldn't believe how much better it looked than 1080p.

>>382318506

>it doesn't matter if it doesn't look realistic at all

Why even post in this thread?

>>382318425

3D and VR are gimmicks, increasing of resolution is not, a resolution has never been reached and then gone out of fashion, that's not how it works, if you want something to look photo realistic you need the pixel space to do it.

consumer shit can't even push 4k steady

>>382318890
>realistic
"Bing bing wahoo" shit needs to be realistic?
Cell-shaded shit needs to be realistic?
Okay, I'll let "cinematic" shit slide, that does need the realism, because it invokes the feeling watching a movie, but, seriously, you are playing a game - why would you need it to be graphically realistic? It's a game, not a VR experience.

If you want actual realism - add realistic physics. Add grass simulation. Add good-looking shadows. Add actual interaction with the environment and not just pretty 4K cardboard cutouts like in the fucking Ass Creed series. Hell, add fully destructible environment like Red Faction managed to in the fucking 2009.

You are being sold pretty cosmetic shit that can't even be interacted with. It's a game - interactions are the whole point. What's the point of adding shit that can't be interacted with into a videogame?

>>382318786
But SD resolutions AREN'T much worse than HD reaokutiins.

File: 1451179409518.jpg (65KB, 454x419px) Image search: [Google]

65KB, 454x419px

>12k

Here's what I want to know, at what point will you personally be satisfied? I can understand the push to advance technology, but how many of you truly want this? I've been playing games for quite a while, and honestly I can't ever think of a time where I wanted more out of the resolution or the graphics or whatever. It's just a thought that never crossed my mind. Why would I care if the game is only 720p/1080p when it's already pretty fun? What makes a person look at what they've got and think, "I want this to be even SHINIER"?

It makes me think that some people don't even care about playing the games themselves anymore, they just want everything to look like Crysis x1000.

>>382319156
I'm pretty sure you can achieve photorealism on an old bigass CRT TV.

It's a gimmick.

How likely is it that devs will actually provide textures etc that makes 4k worthwhile? Seems to me that a lot of devs are struggling with it even today.

>>382319471

Nice moving of the goal posts there kiddo, increasing of resolution = better image quality. 4K TV is far superior to HD TV and if you can't see that it isn't your eyes suck.

>>382319420
Anon, a game can be fun and shiny.

>>382319420
This. PC gamers (and people who argue over resolutions of console ports) are retards.

>>382319195

A game at 4K looks more realistic than a game at 1080p, we are not talking about physics or attributes in the game other than visuals, this is not a thread at all about that.

>>382319662

.t the person who posts Uncharted screenshots in the screenshots threads and claims the game looks better than a PC game.

>>382319601
>increasing of resolution = better image quality.
Nope
>4K TV is far superior to HD TV
Nope

I know you want to justify your purchase to yourself but I ain't buying it.

>>382319420
I agree to a point, although 720p definitely isn't good enough. 1080 is pretty fine, I can see why people would want 2440p or 4K, but beyond that what do you really gain? I think it's mostly about being able to game on bigger screens without losing fidelity.

>>382319698
Because you deserve to get trolled.

>>382319672
You are tge kind of person that will always get scammed. Always.

>>382318301
>I don't see my friends talking about 4k and we all mainly play on pc
Then you hang with poor idiots who arent real gamers

>>382313573

Honestly cant stand these resolution memes. We cant even get games optimized that actually run reasonable at 1080p on the hardware you would expect it to anymore. There is barely any difference visually in some games now made like maybe up to 6 years ago but run worse now than they would have back then.

I just wish there was a real priority to make games actually run good before bumping our resolutions up.

>>382314014
Valid for phones, complete bullshit otherwise.

>>382313863
I feel like the 180+ car models is clearly a feature.

>>382319672
>"I don't see the point in increasing resolut---"
>"WE ARE DISCUSSING RESOLUTION HERE, LEAVE IMMEDIATELY"
really, nigga?

File: 1485448133593.jpg (22KB, 640x360px) Image search: [Google]

22KB, 640x360px

>>382314014
>Nobody can tell the difference between dvd and blu ray anyway.

This is how you sound.

>>382320056

90% of your post was about nothing related to graphics at all you fucking moron.

>>382319886

Yeah I'm scammed when I upgrade my monitor once every 4/5 years.

Completely scammed.

>>382319746

Just saying it is not true doesn't make it not true, all the evidence shows that you are completely fucking wrong, you need your eyes tested if you can't see the superior difference.

>>382313863

They are featured in the game therefore they are features, I don't know what the third thing even means but the other two are definitely features.

>>382313573
>12k
What kind of rig would you even need to run that? That's fucking bizarre.

>>382320471
it's just 3 4k monitors strapped together, there is no 16:9 12k screen available

>>382320806

>repeating the same lie you got called out on earlier

THIS IS NOTHING TO DO WITH INTEL YOU FUCKING RETARD

>>382316468
>muh window icons are smaller
>muh taskbar is smaller
wow so much different. anything higher than 1080p is a meme. 9/10 PCs and even consoles can't even render 1080p yet. If anything higher refresh rates and ultrawide is they way to go as those provide actual visual improvements.