Shift to 4K Gaming

  • 59 results
  • 1
  • 2

This topic is locked from further discussion.

#1 Posted by zeeshanhaider (2418 posts) -

Is anyone here planning to move to 4K gaming in the near future or already has? I think by the end of 2014 though still expensive it would become more reasonable for PC Gamers who can afford high end PC gaming now. I mean by the end of 2014 Maxwell would have been out and the price for 4K TVs would have gone down even lower and then we heard from Crytek that we will have GPU's with 16 teraflops in two years and they said that in the start of 2013.

I'm thinking about switching to 4K by the end of 2014 or mid of 2015 and thinking about replacing the monitor with 4K TV permanently. Has anyone already tried doing all their work on a TV instead of a monitor, not just gaming? Will it have any adverse effect?

And for consololites, I have this to say, stay jelly.

#2 Posted by BattleSpectre (5963 posts) -

It depends. Can someone link me the cheapest 4K monitor/TV going around? and I doubt I could manage 4K with my current setup so I'd need to upgrade some parts. Having said all that I could afford the shift to 4K gaming, but I'm not sure if it's worth it yet. I mean I'd have to see it in motion to see if it justifies all that money I'd need to spend.

#3 Posted by Motokid6 (5231 posts) -

My next new pc will be a 4k system. Few years maybe.

#4 Posted by zeeshanhaider (2418 posts) -

It depends. Can someone link me the cheapest 4K monitor/TV going around? and I doubt I could manage 4K with my current setup so I'd need to upgrade some parts. Having said all that I could afford the shift to 4K gaming, but I'm not sure if it's worth it yet. I mean I'd have to see it in motion to see if it justifies all that money I'd need to spend.

Don't know about the cheapest TV/Monitor but I'm currently eying at Sony's 65" UHD TV which are priced at $4K for now. I hope it will come down to ~$2K range.

#5 Edited by BeardMaster (1580 posts) -

4k is just the next 3D, a tv industry with tanking sales desperately trying to get people to replace their tv with nonsense gimmicks.

#6 Edited by AutoPilotOn (8203 posts) -

I don't plan on it anytime soon. 1080p looks great to me. I can't justify another new tv for serveral years and definitely not at 2 or 4k dollars.

#7 Posted by clyde46 (44814 posts) -

4k is just the next 3D, a tv industry with tanking sales desperately trying to get people to replace their tv with nonsense gimmicks.

3D was a gimmick, 4K is not.

#8 Posted by BeardMaster (1580 posts) -

@clyde46: Outside of human-hawk hybrids. Its mostly a gimmick. You will goto a bestbuy, eskimo kiss the screen.. get really impressed only to realize under normal viewing circumstances it doesnt make a difference.

Or you will turn into one of those guys that swears monster cables offer better picture quality because they cant come to terms with the fact they were duped.

#9 Edited by clyde46 (44814 posts) -

@clyde46: Outside of human-hawk hybrids. Its mostly a gimmick. You will goto a bestbuy, eskimo kiss the screen.. get really impressed only to realize under normal viewing circumstances it doesnt make a difference.

Or you will turn into one of those guys that swears monster cables offer better picture quality because they cant come to terms with the fact they were duped.

Have you actually seen 4K content outside of Bestbuy? I've seen 4K content being captured and then broadcast and the difference is like night and day. You seem to be under the impression that if it makes no difference to you then that applies to everyone.

Monster cables are a waste of money, its a digital signal being sent, its either on or off.

#10 Posted by Benny_Blakk (906 posts) -

@zeeshanhaider: It is going to remain a premium until 2017. A GPU that can handle high frame rate at that resolution that will cost less than $1000 won't hit the market till late 2015, earliest. If I'm wrong, then I hope it would be sooner because that would be great. If later, then you already know.

#11 Edited by AutoPilotOn (8203 posts) -

I think most tv channels aren't even full 1080p unless it's pay per view. When will 4k TV be out ?

#12 Posted by farrell2k (5793 posts) -

If I can buy a 4k capable card for $199, and a monitor for $100, I will do it, otherwise 1080p is just fine for me.

#13 Posted by jake44 (1960 posts) -

Outside of human-hawk hybrids. Its mostly a gimmick. You will goto a bestbuy, eskimo kiss the screen.. get really impressed only to realize under normal viewing circumstances it doesnt make a difference.

You're just silly.

#14 Posted by clyde46 (44814 posts) -

I think most tv channels aren't even full 1080p unless it's pay per view. When will 4k TV be out ?

When they have more spectrum.

#15 Edited by napo_sp (218 posts) -

nope, more excited with 3440x1440 res; would want to see 5120x2160 but that's too high of a res for contemporary pc gaming.

#16 Posted by gameofthering (10126 posts) -

If they are 120Hz / 144Hz then I would gladly buy one.

#17 Posted by drekula2 (1906 posts) -

Depends how badly you want it and how willing you are to pay.

I would say it should be more affordable next gen, say 8 years from now.

#18 Posted by GioVela2010 (4018 posts) -

No because they don't market 4k in 90" Plasmas or OLED.

LCD is garbage

#19 Posted by lostrib (34245 posts) -

No, not any time soon

#20 Posted by Ginosaji (965 posts) -

It depends on the quality and price of 4k monitors when I build a new PC in 2016. I'll probably pick up lower resolution dual monitors for a more reasonable price, though.

#21 Edited by MonsieurX (29474 posts) -

No because they don't market 4k in 90" Plasmas or OLED.

LCD is garbage

http://reviews.cnet.com/8301-35205_7-57601448-10391741/samsung-touts-4k-oled-tv-98-inch-behemoth/

Wrong,as usual

#22 Posted by heretrix (37306 posts) -

@clyde46 said:

Monster cables are a waste of money, its a digital signal being sent, its either on or off.

Oh GOD, this.

I can't count how many times I've had to explain this to people. Even the store brand HDMI cables are too expensive. If you are spending more than 10 bucks for your cables you are paying too much. Order your cables ahead of time from the internet (there are too many places to list) and save money. Even with shipping you will come out ahead.

#23 Edited by Master_ShakeXXX (13361 posts) -

I don't even care about 4K, and probably will continue to not care until it becomes a standard thing. The jump from 1080p to 4k is much less significant than the jump from 720p to 1080p so it's not like you're missing out much.

#24 Posted by APiranhaAteMyVa (2869 posts) -

No because they don't market 4k in 90" Plasmas or OLED.

LCD is garbage

OLED will become the standard, but Plasma is pretty much dead now regardless of size. Panasonic who was making the best Plasmas have seized production, leaving LG and Samsung who both will go with OLED. Massive OLED 4K TVs will certainly come out over the next few years.

#25 Edited by ShadowDeathX (10575 posts) -

Late 2014/Early 2015.

#26 Edited by Telekill (4389 posts) -

My TV that maxes out at 720p/1080i still works perfectly after 6 years. When it breaks, I'll probably replace it with a TV that does 1080p. That makes it so I probably won't need a 4K capable system till PS6.

#27 Posted by whatsazerg (195 posts) -

@Motokid6 said:

My next new pc will be a 4k system. Few years maybe.

same... I'll wait til the price is reasonable though... When I can buy a 40" - 46" 4k HDTV for somewhere between $500 & $1k... and a video card that can support 4k gaming whilst not sacrificing fps or high res textures... b/c if you have to sacrifice visual quality in all other areas... is there really any point in spending $$$ on a 4k TV / Vid Card?

#28 Posted by GioVela2010 (4018 posts) -

@APiranhaAteMyVa: I guess u and I have a different definition of "near future".

To me near future when talking about audio/video technology is within a year.

So no, I won't be getting 4k in the near future because LCD is garbage, large OLED 4k will be too expensive for years, and 4k Plasma will likely never happen

#29 Posted by ShadowDeathX (10575 posts) -

I don't even care about 4K, and probably will continue to not care until it becomes a standard thing. The jump from 1080p to 4k is much less significant than the jump from 720p to 1080p so it's not like you're missing out much.

720p to 1080p is roughly 2 times of a jump.

1080p to 4K is roughly 4 times the jump.

#30 Posted by Motokid6 (5231 posts) -

Lol at all the cavemen here. "Its just a gimmick." LMAO .. gtfo.

#31 Edited by IgGy621985 (4624 posts) -

I hate 3D. I won't hate 4K.

#32 Posted by bezza2011 (2372 posts) -

@BeardMaster: you must be one of these lot who thinks there is no difference between 720p and 1080p I mean the difference from 1080p to 4k is huge, lets put it in your terms 1080p to 4000p that's a massive leap forward if you believe this is a gimmick then I believe you would be classed as blind, forget bedtbuy way of selling if you buy 4k you know it isn't a gimmick you'd know even if it was at the cheap end. 3d is the biggest gimmick but people enjoy it.

#33 Posted by Motokid6 (5231 posts) -

Im enjoying my 3d Tv very much. I watch all my movies with the glasses on.

#34 Posted by The_Stand_In (377 posts) -

LOL at people saying 4k is a gimmick. Just like when 1080 was a gimmick, right?

#35 Edited by freedomfreak (39080 posts) -

Saw a 4K TV in the store today.

€24.999.

#36 Posted by Mozelleple112 (6621 posts) -

Not like this silly "consumer 4K" (3840x2160p) on 50-65" displays will ever match true cinema 4K (4096x2160p) displays like the Sony VPL-VW1000ES

#37 Posted by g0ddyX (3905 posts) -

Pricey stuff.
Better for those who have it and games that support it.

#38 Posted by BeardMaster (1580 posts) -

@bezza2011: No im classified as a realist. Are 16k tv gonna be a massive leap too?

at a certain point higher resolution equates to zero results. Im in the same camp as John Carmack, in that outside of head mounted units like the oculus rift, there is no major benefit to 4k displays.

#39 Edited by Mozelleple112 (6621 posts) -

@bezza2011: No im classified as a realist. Are 16k tv gonna be a massive leap too?

at a certain point higher resolution equates to zero results. Im in the same camp as John Carmack, in that outside of head mounted units like the oculus rift, there is no major benefit to 4k displays.

16K will defnitely make a difference on large conventional/commercial cinema screens. We're talking 300+ inches. (60 feet, 100 feet wide etc)

In other words, if your display is measured in inches and not feet, you won't benefit from 8K or 16K in the future...

#40 Edited by Zen_Light (1231 posts) -

1080p still isn't standard for tv signals, is the standard for disc-based media, and just becoming a standard for 90% of gaming. 4K will not become any kind of standard for many years to come, probably 6-10 down the road or longer.

#41 Edited by TheMistique (1421 posts) -

@BeardMaster said:

@clyde46: Outside of human-hawk hybrids. Its mostly a gimmick. You will goto a bestbuy, eskimo kiss the screen.. get really impressed only to realize under normal viewing circumstances it doesnt make a difference.

Or you will turn into one of those guys that swears monster cables offer better picture quality because they cant come to terms with the fact they were duped.

No. You are wrong. I wont even consider this an opinion. I seriously think we are moving way too slow when it comes to TV panel tech. I bough the seiki 39" 4k tv for $500 on amazon when it was on sale and it was awesome! Finally video games looked sharp on anything larger than a 24". The only problem was the inputs were only hdmi which in turn means the panel could only refresh at 30hz, and that is simply not acceptable. Display port input would have solved this. What i'm trying to say is 1080p is not good enough anymore and looks like crap when you see gaming at 4k. we need this tech to come into existence faster. Pixel density is really important to me and can make or break immersion. 4k is not only not a gimmick, but it is a necessity.

EDIT: sorry i get a little tense when it comes to high rez gaming. didnt mean to get carried away :)

#42 Edited by tubbyc (3671 posts) -

I saw a video review of the R9 290 where he made the point that 4k is not really worth it yet because today's games don't have detailed enough textures to really be able to take advantage of it.

So I mean, the picture would look a bit nicer, but you wouldn't be getting the full benefit of 4k.

When many games really can take full advantage of 4k because they have far more detailed textures (not to mention all of the other forms of eye-candy as developers make the most of the latest engines), you'll need a high-end PC for the time. Something better than a high-end GPU you may have now, which already struggles with maxing out today's demanding games at 4k.

To me, it doesn't seem worth it for a long time. I would rather be content with my 1050p monitor (which obviously can show highly detailed textures) and put my resources towards other things during this gen, like all of the other visual enhancements which will come with new games coming out.

#43 Posted by stuff238 (614 posts) -

Not anytime soon. Too expensive and there is barely any content available anyway.

#44 Posted by jhonMalcovich (4497 posts) -

If you have money for a triple sli of GTX780ti

#45 Edited by XBOunity (2981 posts) -

@g0ddyX said:

Pricey stuff.

Better for those who have it and games that support it.

that avatar makes me wanna throw up. really bad

#46 Posted by kemar7856 (11506 posts) -

u guys think 4k will be practical next year LOL when a tv is over 3k and not even a thousand dollar gpu alone can run a high end game at that resolution I would say 2017 not until ou can get one for under $1000 and a single gpu can do it

#47 Posted by Gaming-Planet (13983 posts) -

I still don't have a 1080p monitor. Shame on me.

#48 Edited by Vambran (1920 posts) -

4k will happen. Just not anytime soon. They were talking about HD TVs in the 80's and they only became mainstream around 2005.

#49 Posted by zeeshanhaider (2418 posts) -

@zeeshanhaider: It is going to remain a premium until 2017. A GPU that can handle high frame rate at that resolution that will cost less than $1000 won't hit the market till late 2015, earliest. If I'm wrong, then I hope it would be sooner because that would be great. If later, then you already know.

I think 2015 is the year when the transition will start happening.

Lol at people saying 4K is a gimmick. Heard the same thing about 1080p last generation.

#50 Edited by DirkXXVI (497 posts) -

@zeeshanhaider said:

@Benny_Blakk said:

@zeeshanhaider: It is going to remain a premium until 2017. A GPU that can handle high frame rate at that resolution that will cost less than $1000 won't hit the market till late 2015, earliest. If I'm wrong, then I hope it would be sooner because that would be great. If later, then you already know.

I think 2015 is the year when the transition will start happening.

Lol at people saying 4K is a gimmick. Heard the same thing about 1080p last generation.

Yeah, I still see people talk about how theres no difference between 720p and 1080p. I'd like them to play a PC game on a big screen TV or even a 27 inch monitor where you can switch back and forth between 720p and 1080p. It's a clear difference even if you're a layman. Granted I've never seen 4k in person, at least not to my knowledge, so I can't speak to weather or not it's worth it. However I'd be very surprised to not see a significant bump in picture quality at a regular viewing distance. Even if it's only a 55 inch screen.

As for 4k gaming being worth it or at least more of a standard. I don't think we're at that point. Granted if you have the money it's a nice perk but it's more of a luxury then anything else. Consider that even the Titan, 780 ti, and r9 290x all have trouble maxing out games at 1080p/60fps like Crysis 3 so it's hard to say that we're ready for 4K gaming. I'd say we need to master 1080p with a single card setup before talking about how the industry is ready to take on 4k.

Granted in the future the real 4K bottleneck could be ISP's like Comcast who don't want to upgrade their infastructure.