4k in gaming

In a couple of years, depending on the games that come out

I can't think of a single current-gen game on console or PC that could justify buying a 4K display let alone a GPU that could run it at that resolution with high / max settings.

>>386479001
I agree, the difference in visuals between 4k and 1080 just aren't enough to justify the bump in price. Movies in 4k are great but that's mainly for the HDR, which games look great in 4k too but very few support it and you don't need the 4k machines for anyway. I'd rather have 1080p 60fps on my console exclusives than 4k at this point.

File: gtav-acer[1].jpg (132KB, 1000x643px) Image search: [Google]

132KB, 1000x643px

3440x1440 is the ideal gaming resolution in my opinion. Pixel density is plenty good, and (when it's supported) gaming in 21:9 is amazing

>>386478484
>>Xbox One X is shaping up to be the same
It's 50% more powerful than a PS4 Pro and doesn't even have a fan in it.

>>386479868
i agree, I have a 2560x1080 and it's pretty good but yeah it could use some more pixel density.

>>386480000
liquid cooling is a meme and all but forza have been confirmed to be 30fps. Even if I'm wrong xbox has nothing to play

File: angela knife silent hill 2.png (1MB, 1200x720px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1200x720px

>>386479192
Personally I'd just wait for OLED displays to drop in price before jumping to 4K and even then I'd be primarily buying it for watching movies and tv series, not gaming.

Then again I'm a jaded cunt that mostly plays older games from the PS2 / 360 era.

>>386480421
you'd be surprised at how great ps2 looks on a 4k tv, especially the Silent Hill games. I was playing 3 earlier through composite and it's pretty crisp.

>>386478484
I have a 4k gsync and a gsync 2k rog with epic insane hz.

The difference is minimal. I play everything on the 2k screen and 4k for.... Secondary non important shit lol. Though i guess MKx or teken are fine on it

I have a 55 inch 4K OLED TV that I watch from about 1,6 metres away, and I find the difference between 1440p and 4K mostly minimal. You can see some difference if you look at the edges of text, small UI elements etc., but the difference is smaller than you would expect and isn't really noticeable when actually playing games instead of comparing how it looks. The difference between 1080p and 1440p is much bigger really, that I would consider actually significant.

Considering how fucking expensive 4K capable GPU setups are (I have GTX 1080 and it still can't run most new games at 4K at 60 FPS), I'd say that aiming for it is mostly irrelevant for now unless you have a fuckhuge screen and tons of money.

>>386481245
I'd also add that the contrast and color difference between the old VA television and OLED was much more notable than the resolution increase, if I had to choose between an OLED TV with 1080p resolution or VA with 4K, OLED would win easily.

>>386481469
Exactly this, we should be demanding more color work in games, not more resolution.

>>386478484
4k tv have horrible input lag.
Imo you should wait till they make "gamer" 4k tv (freesync, etc).

>>386480143
So we're just making shit up now?

https://www.gamespot.com/articles/e3-2017-forza-7-revealed-runs-at-native-4k60fps-on/1100-6450745/

File: huh.png (10KB, 100x100px) Image search: [Google]

10KB, 100x100px

>>386481650
>say all but forza
>you link me forza
huh

>>386481650
he's maybe talking about forza open world. however hes full of shit. xbox x isn't about liquid cooling. it's a new tech used by nvidia gtx1080ti gpu.

>>386481585
This is exactly why I'm pumped about HDR. Going above 1080p might give only small benefits for the TV sizes that most consumers have, but HDR is an instant day and night difference if it is implemented well. It's much more impactful tech than 4K is, and I hope that it gets implemented in everything as fast as possible.

>>386481859
Agreed, in the few games I own with HDR support, it looks amazing. I hope all major future releases incorporate it and it being a standard in the next gen.

>>386481650
Forza 7 is the only Xbox One X game confirmed to be 4K at 60fps, most are 30fps or checkerboard at 30fps

>>386481637
Some Samsung and LG models have reached input lag levels of around 21ms, it really shouldn't be noticeable for anything except the fastest competitive games. But yeah, there is still some room to improve.

>>386482000
Just like the ps4 pro. The X is going to be just as bad.

>>386482057
I agree. If i play on my tv its to play with a controller in a sofa. The only thing that still bother me in screen in general : The lack of freesync. + the rx480 is too weak anyway for 4k (except if you checkerbord + 30fps).
This is why i hope that the scorpio will be a success.

>>386478484
The 10xx series from Nvidia and AMD's 4xx series onwards have begun optimizing for higher resolutions (significantly more VRAM, far larger bandwidth, higher bus sizes etc). In two or so graphics card generations, I'll bet you can expect to see 4K being a very affordable resolution. So, about 3 or 4 years? It's already doable now with a 1070 for almost all games at medium settings, and a better card like a 1080/1080ti will let you play with max/near-max settings at 4K with almost any game.

As others are also saying in this thread, keep an eye out for better HDR support in the near future as well. I'm personally excited for that too.

>>386482297
agreed, I think both systems are shit. I'm sticking with my launch PS4 and fat Xbone.

If I want to play at >1080p I'll stick to my desktop.

>Aiming for 4K when you can't even go above 60 FPS

144hz+ or bust.

>>386482881
Yeah that's pretty much where I'm at too. I was looking at the xbox one s because it can play 4k blu ray, but since launch you can easily get 4k players for cheaper so I'll just go with one of those.

>>386482742
keep in mind that in 2 years we might see another console gen though.

File: cat.jpg (134KB, 822x1199px) Image search: [Google]

134KB, 822x1199px

>>386483039
Given that the PS4 came out 4 years ago already, that's not too surprising. 6 years is a reasonable lifespan for a console generation.

The new consoles will most certainly be able to do 4K though. The graphical power of both the PS4 Pro and the Xbox One X is just about there, if only falling a little short. The bigger issue lies in their now-outdated CPUs, which are definitely not going to be an issue in the next generation, as both PS and Xbox rely on AMD for chips, and they finally have really good CPUs on the market again.

The future is bright for everyone.

>>386483619
Yeah with ryzen out and fucking killing it, I wouldn't be surprised of next gen we see a good boost in power for same starting price of about $400

>>386483619
>The new consoles will most certainly be able to do 4K though
Heres the question : Will the next gen console will directly aim at 4k? in that case we might see low graphic improvement.

This gen was perfect from a PC player pov : You were never limited by the console hardware since you could aim at higher resolution.

>>386484136
Every gen is perfect for PC, in retrospect. I would rather take little in graphical improvement than another gen where 30fps is the target and sub 30 dips are acceptable.

>>386484136
Well I have a controversial opinion on that. Proper checkerboarding implementations (Horizon Zero Dawn comes to mind mostly, perhaps the new Battlefield) look really, really good. I couldn't tell it wasn't 4K unless I specifically looked for temporal artifacts from the checkerboarding method they used.
Personally, I'd be happier if they saved the extra power for better quality effects, details, and a stable 60fps, rather than simply pushing the resolution higher.

>You were never limited by the console hardware since you could aim at higher resolution.
Not necessarily. Games that only ran at 30fps on consoles were usually ported very poorly to PC (Forza Horizon 3 was a good example, although now patched), and with good reason. Developers made a conscious effort to maximize what they got out of 30fps, and a lot of the physics calculations or graphics didn't run well at all, at double the framerate, requiring far much more power. Framerate parity will make this even better for everyone, and new console CPUs will make that happen.

>>386483804
yep, Xbox One X is coming out too late and PS4 Pro should never have even been released. In a year or so we'll have Ryzen APUs that absolutely shit on the Xbox One X and PS4 Pro.

>>386485010
exactly, as much as I'd like a 4k machine for my tv, there's just no point right now, next batch is whay I'm going to have to wait for.

>>386478484
>play in 1080p
>let the upscaler inside your TV do the work
>you are now playing in 4K

>>386485324
you're not wrong, the difference at the distance I play at is hardly noticeable.

>>386478484
So why the fuck did you buy the TV if you have nothing to use it on you shit

>>386484848
Fh3 was one of the very few game poorly optimized.
On PC if you wanna play safe you need to get a big cpu and not fail for the i5 meme.

>>386485171
Yeah, I already do 1440p/60 on my desktop so I'm not that tempted to go to 30fps on a console that is $500, plays the same games as my fat Xbone I rarely use, and isn't even out yet. Shit, the best Xbox One game isn't even getting updated for the X.

File: 1495902205669.png (305KB, 500x447px) Image search: [Google]

305KB, 500x447px

>>386481650
>All BUT Forza
>Links Forza

>>386485443
I have an i7 6700K with a 4.6GHz OC. There weren't a ton of games that ported too horribly, but more than a few, and while I can run them well, the requirements for those games is still unreasonable. Just Cause 3 is another that comes to mind that I was playing earlier today.
But yeah, no reason to get an i5 anymore these days. Ryzen 1600/1600X outperform it for cheaper, and the i7 chips have dropped in price steeply thanks to good competition.

>>386485967
Sometimes dev are just lazy and it's not necessarily the console fault. Just good engines : Look at how well the games on unreal engine run.
On the other hand idtech 5 was a mess for PC and Console.

Recently got a 4k monitor. 4k is a game changer for sure. Makes 1080p almost unplayable.

>>386485405
I had a 29" 720p before, I needed an upgrade and I wasn't going to buy a 1080p for about the same price you can get a decent 4k.

>>386485847
and then he's silent when he gets called out, it's pretty funny.

>>386485847
http://wccftech.com/path-exile-xbox-one-x-4k60fps-two-hours/

File: ship it.png (517KB, 523x410px) Image search: [Google]

517KB, 523x410px

>>386486525
I mean, all devs are lazy to some extent. No one's going to go out of their way to spend tons of hours and money specializing a version of their game for one single platform of several that they support. The idea is that bringing consoles closer to PC lets developers do less work to make their games run great on all platforms.
I wouldn't put the blame on any engine. Every tool is great when used properly, and it's only when developers don't put enough work into their game, that it will fail. UE4 games can run like hot garbage when not used properly: example being Rime. On the other hand, Unity games can run amazing when used properly: example being INSIDE. I've worked with both engines and they have ups and downs. My personal biggest gripe with UE4 is the ridiculous amount of space these games take up. Gears of War 4 is now over 100GB in size on PC.

>>386487202
Should low power ports count? Of course they're going to run well. Path would run just as well on PS4 pro. The point is that they're the same.

>>386487340
>Every tool is great when used properly, and it's only when developers don't put enough work into their game, that it will fail
No. You are always limited by an engine at some point in terms of performance or capability.
The idtech 5 was fucked no matter what on every game, even dishonored 2.
The idtech 6 shits on it. Don't tell me the developper of wolfenstein suddenly became good.
Another case would be unity.
>UE4 games can run like hot garbage when not used properly
No shit. Still no games released on UE4 was fucked (see GoW4 for exemple while it was aim at the xbox like FH3).
>Gears of War 4 is now over 100GB in size on PC.
This is 4k textures. Nothing to do with the engine. Its like Doom.

Not for another 5 years. It's still too new and not worth it.

>>386478484
>my GTX 980 doesn't have a Display Port
>GTX 980 for 4K gaming
wew

>>386488194
>any tv in existence that has a displayport in
I wasn't talking about monitors, and I already said it wouldn't run anything at 4k

>>386487767
>No. You are always limited by an engine at some point in terms of performance or capability.
Sure, and it's the developers' job to avoid and dance around these limitations in an elegant way that makes a good game. A "good" engine simply makes this easier for the developer to do, which all engines nowadays are more than capable of.
id tech 5 isn't a bad engine, and neither is id tech 6. Wolfenstein: The New Order and The Old Blood were made on id tech 5.

>Still no games released on UE4 was fucked
I just mentioned Rime, it sure doesn't run well.

>This is 4k textures. Nothing to do with the engine.
Not quite. An engine's support for various compression formats and similar technologies impacts filesize directly. For example, I think UE4 only natively supports DXT for texture compression, which isn't the greatest tech anymore(?)

>>386479868
>3440x1440 is the ideal gaming resolution in my opinion. Pixel density is plenty good, and (when it's supported) gaming in 21:9 is amazing

A 4k display is more future-proofed

Lots of games from around 2014 & earlier run fine at 4k60 (even newer games like Phantom Pain)

1440p upscaled to 4k looks fine too; basically a 4k display can do anything an ultrawide or lower res screen can do

>>386481637
>4k tv have horrible input lag.

except that isn't true, some 2017 models are now approaching 10ms:

http://www.rtings.com/tv/tests/inputs/input-lag

4k is a meme though. Higher hz and higher fps are what really matter.