Fuck 4k, HDR should be what we're all aiming for. 1440p

>>386767154
As a photography fag, I can safely say HDR for video games is a meme.
Basically, you're asking to render a game three times at once.

>>386767384
>Basically, you're asking to render a game three times at once.
the fuck u talkin about retard

>>386767154
you know there is a HDR, gsync, 144hz 4k monitor coming right?

>inb4 but it will be too expensive

Fuck off, you poorfags are the rason we can't have nice things for atleast 5 more years

>>386767154
This.
I don't get the 4k meme. I can literally see no difference between a 1440p and 4k monitor. 4k only makes sense for VR

>>386767384
Lol do you think HDR videos are shot with three different exposures too?

>>386768130
I think he's talking about the games, not the monitors.
Most games nowadays aim for higher resolution instead of higher framerate

>>386768130
>>386768612
Yeah no I was talking about the games. I have a 4k HDR tv and a ps4 and there are too few games that support it.

>>386767384
>render 3 times
Are you dumb? Yeah in photography HDR is stupid and isn't important, but you have to be joking if you think it affect performance. Base PS4 had it added 3 years after launch and it doesn't impact performance at all.

>>386768387
You don't know what your talking about.

>I can literally see no difference between a 1440p and 4k monitor

Do you own a 4k monitor? I bet no so you are speaking out of your ass.

Even 4kDSR makes the games look much better, use the slider and see the details:
http://images.nvidia.com/geforce-com/international/comparisons/rise-of-the-tomb-raider/alt/rise-of-the-tomb-raider-nvidia-dynamic-super-resolution-interactive-comparison-001-2560x1440-vs-3840x2160.html

HDR is more of a step up than 4k desu

1080p 60fps is what we should be aiming for.

Since we still can't even reliably hit that on most games.

normies dont care as much about higher refresh rate than higher resolution

>>386767154
I don't even understand what HDR is, or how it would be beneficial to vidya.

>>386767154
That sounds nice

>>386769132
Agreed, hard

>>386769104
It depends on a lot of factors. I'd say for monitors you can tell the difference, but for TVs it really depends. Like I have a 4k and can barely tell the difference between 1080p and 4k content because of how far I sit from it. I bought it for color anyway.

>>386769261
It widens the colors available for games to show. So not just like wow this is really blue, one of the best parts is games with really dark scenes pop more because they're not just using the same 100 black shades they have, it's like 100,000 (I'm probably exaggerating but it's a night and day difference).

>>386769104
Putting a system's power towards the actual game's visuals instead of resolution makes a much more noticable difference

>>386769369
>I have no idea what I'm talking about

>>386769543
Can you tell us how he's wrong?

Only if it has some automatic feature that changes to HDR if a compatible full screen application runs at.
As it stands, not many PC games support it, and neither does Windows itself with its shitty ancient RGB colorspace.

>>386767154
The problem with HDR is you get really bad color banding with anything that's not HDR.

>>386769543
good argument

How about making good games again instead of blowing budgets on cutting edge graphics? Can we do that? Please?

>>386770556
there's no reason there can't be both dumbass