(Video) Crysis 3 - 8K Render

This topic is locked from further discussion.

#1 Posted by TCheetor (37 posts) -
#2 Posted by PredatorRules (7007 posts) -

DAMN, Was planning to watch it on 8K, you know I have a time machine; DAMN forgot I don't own a 4K either because they're so pricy this time; DAMN forgot that I won't need AA no more in games when I do own a 4K monitor.

#3 Posted by Horgen (109948 posts) -

@PredatorRules: Make use of the multimonitor tools that AMD has and I think you can blow the image on to 4 4K monitors to get 8K... I assume that every gamer with respect for himself/herself has a set-up with 4 or more 4K monitors with the horsepower to run it as well. :P

#4 Edited by adamosmaki (9340 posts) -

@PredatorRules: Make use of the multimonitor tools that AMD has and I think you can blow the image on to 4 4K monitors to get 8K... I assume that every gamer with respect for himself/herself has a set-up with 4 or more 4K monitors with the horsepower to run it as well. :P

and at 60fps for what it matters or else it ain't worth it ( damn it GS bring smileys back )

#5 Edited by PredatorRules (7007 posts) -

#6 Posted by Horgen (109948 posts) -

@horgen123 said:

@PredatorRules: Make use of the multimonitor tools that AMD has and I think you can blow the image on to 4 4K monitors to get 8K... I assume that every gamer with respect for himself/herself has a set-up with 4 or more 4K monitors with the horsepower to run it as well. :P

and at 60fps for what it matters or else it ain't worth it ( damn it GS bring smileys back )

Not to derail to much, but I've heard, can't remember the exact reason why, that if you want a crisp image at 4K, you also need to double the FPS of what you have at 1080P. Something about the now the objects would move over twice as many pixels which would defeat the crispyness that 4K gives, to make up for it you need to double up the FPS as well.

Came over something like that on a Norwegian forum...

#7 Edited by adamosmaki (9340 posts) -

@horgen123 said:

@adamosmaki said:

@horgen123 said:

@PredatorRules: Make use of the multimonitor tools that AMD has and I think you can blow the image on to 4 4K monitors to get 8K... I assume that every gamer with respect for himself/herself has a set-up with 4 or more 4K monitors with the horsepower to run it as well. :P

and at 60fps for what it matters or else it ain't worth it ( damn it GS bring smileys back )

Not to derail to much, but I've heard, can't remember the exact reason why, that if you want a crisp image at 4K, you also need to double the FPS of what you have at 1080P. Something about the now the objects would move over twice as many pixels which would defeat the crispyness that 4K gives, to make up for it you need to double up the FPS as well.

Came over something like that on a Norwegian forum...

well it does make sense. Also 4k going mainstream is what monitor manufacturers, Nvidia and AMD are waiting and everyone will benefit from the move to 4k. Heck i believe reasonable prices for 4k capable monitors and gpu's with enough power to play games on them will come sooner than later ( like a year or two ) though getting to penetration levels of 1080p it will certainly take a long time

#8 Posted by GummiRaccoon (13593 posts) -

@adamosmaki said:

@horgen123 said:

@PredatorRules: Make use of the multimonitor tools that AMD has and I think you can blow the image on to 4 4K monitors to get 8K... I assume that every gamer with respect for himself/herself has a set-up with 4 or more 4K monitors with the horsepower to run it as well. :P

and at 60fps for what it matters or else it ain't worth it ( damn it GS bring smileys back )

Not to derail to much, but I've heard, can't remember the exact reason why, that if you want a crisp image at 4K, you also need to double the FPS of what you have at 1080P. Something about the now the objects would move over twice as many pixels which would defeat the crispyness that 4K gives, to make up for it you need to double up the FPS as well.

Came over something like that on a Norwegian forum...

4k is exactly 4x as many pixels as 1080p. However, you would need much less AA on a 4k monitor the same size of a 1080p monitor.

#9 Edited by Marfoo (5993 posts) -

#

@horgen123 said:

@adamosmaki said:

@horgen123 said:

@PredatorRules: Make use of the multimonitor tools that AMD has and I think you can blow the image on to 4 4K monitors to get 8K... I assume that every gamer with respect for himself/herself has a set-up with 4 or more 4K monitors with the horsepower to run it as well. :P

and at 60fps for what it matters or else it ain't worth it ( damn it GS bring smileys back )

Not to derail to much, but I've heard, can't remember the exact reason why, that if you want a crisp image at 4K, you also need to double the FPS of what you have at 1080P. Something about the now the objects would move over twice as many pixels which would defeat the crispyness that 4K gives, to make up for it you need to double up the FPS as well.

Came over something like that on a Norwegian forum...

I understand what you're saying. Because there are more pixels your eye should be able to tell apart more minute changes in motion, or dPx/dt. A finer time step is needed to actually see the more minute movements. While agree this is true, it seems like this is a very circumstantial because depending on how fast any object is moving its "smoothness" will deteriorate at some point given a certain FPS. I think the biggest 4k benefit here is the added details. If there is a benefit to viewing motion it's extra. Higher FPS is always better if you can get away with it.

@GummiRaccoon: Yep, running 4k at the same size as 1080p is the equivalent of running 4x supersampling. The need for AA is drastically reduced.

#10 Edited by _SKatEDiRt_ (2566 posts) -

And this video is for all the people that say 4k or 9k is a gimmic

#11 Posted by Horgen (109948 posts) -

They won't stop because of this video.