How far are we from 4K @60fps Gaming?

Everyone is crying that the next gen of consoles is disappointing in the jump in graphics, and that we're suffering from diminished returns, etc etc.

I think 4K gaming will be the next breakthrough.

If you look in the past, there was the jump from 2D to 3D, then the jump to HD (720p)

I think the jump to 4K will be remembered along those lines

For example: 720p = .9 megapixels. 1080p = 2.1 megapixels. 4K = 8.3 megapixels. So clarity only doubled from 720p to 1080p. Going from 1080 to 4K you're looking at quadrupling the picture quality. Games will probably be 100GBs+, and we will probably at long last enter the uncanny valley of photorealism where the screen starts to look like a window into another world instead of something displaying a image. The future is gaming on 70"+ 4K TVs

So how far are we from 4K?

If PS5 comes in 5-6 years, will it be strong enough to render games at 4K and 60fps?

Is that a rhetorical question? Cause how in the world are we supposed to know?

Until significant change, this is my opinion on 4K...or more aptly, this is what I now believe about 4K.

How far? We have 4k and 60fps gaming on PC already. Also it´s easy to put PC games on TV screen and play with controller.

So, WTF ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT?

Pretty far.

You still need a couple of 780s in order to get reasonable frame rates on modern games.

With a rig thats costs well over 2 grands. then the TV, which will cost you 3/4 grand. 6 Grand MINIMUM for 4K gaming... not realistic right now

I agree with that, so thats why I mentioned a 70" TV. He says 84" TVs will never be mainstream. Why not? You can buy 60" 1080p TVs for $500 almost anywhere nowadays. I would have never dreamed that would be the case just a few years ago. Whos saying a 84" 4K TV wont be reasonably priced (under $2k) 5 years from now?

So PC gamers are playing the latest games in 4k at 60fps? I find that hard to believe

For consoles: Not next gen, but the gen after.

For pc: Already possible, but at an extortionate cost, will be another 4 or 5 years before it is a 'reasonable' price

Have you ever seen a 70"+ TV? They are immensely larger than a 40" TV (I mean, duh, but the size difference is massive - it appears larger than a 30" difference)

With a 84" TV that requires an immense amount of space to set up in your house. What I'm trying to say is that I don't think most people have that much space to set up a TV.

____

OLED is the next big thing and something that I think will benefit the TV industry more than 4K.

4k gaming at 60fps will happen once prices come down for 4k tv's and graphics cards which can handle that res and frame rate come down in price to for the mainstream gamers.

if your talking consoles tho your looking at maybe 10-15years away yet, ps4 is just about reaching 1080p at 60fps for a few titles and thats not even locked yet so we will have to see, but saying that ps4 and xbox one both are capable of showing 4k movies just not games so maybe i could be wrong who knows it's just guess work for anyone until we see movement on the prices of components which can handle 4k at 60fps

I think it's reasonable to assume that 4k TVs will be more affordable and common in 5 years. But as for consoles, if Sony & Microsoft will continue with a fresh batch of consoles, it'll probably be 8-9 years from now at the least. The PS4 & Xbone will most likely have a time frame at least similar to the previous consoles, if not a lot more.

It's a fact, actually. There are a good number of enthusiasts playing at such resolution, though it's not common yet.

4k wont be for most people, like bluray isnt for most people. DVD (480p) still outsells bluray 2:1) 2/3 of people are never going to care about picture quality. The other third will.

Not every 4K TV has to be 84" in order to see the difference. The chart says if you sit 5 feet from a 50" 4K TV you can clearly see the difference. If you arent interested in buying a TV 50" or larger then 4K isnt for you. Your probably still watching DVDs anyway.

But think about what 4K will do for games. Apparently you may not even need anti aliasing at such high resolution

For the PC it´s already being done,for consoles it´s hard to say,most likely not even the next gen of consoles in a few years will be able to pull it off.

@DarthaPerkinjan: 60" 1080p TVs for $500.

No offense but where the **** can you buy a full HD 60" TV for that cheap? I'll buy another one if that's the case. Maybe that's in America but here in Australia good luck trying to find one for that price.

If PCs can do it now why could consoles not do it in 5 years? If the next Playstation has a GPU just 4x stronger then the PS4 thats 7 Tflops, nearly double a Geforce Titan.

On sale and off brand of course. A local outlet had 10 Panasonic 60" plasmas for $499 a few months back. Plasmas can be dirt cheap.

For the same reason as these new consoles are barely doing 1080p/60fps with launch,early next gen games(imagine when the graphics start to get much better,almost no game will do it and we´ll be back to either 1080p/30fps or more likely 720p/900p/30fps,especially with the xbox one),even though this has been a thing on the PC well before the launcg of the 360 7 years ago,and the fact that this leap is much,much larger from a tech standpoint.

Not to mention that the new standard on the PC is now 120fps,another thing that is also unlikely on next gen consoles,but certainly more feasible than 4k on consoles.

@DarthaPerkinjan: Like I said only in America (or wherever you're from). Still that's dirt cheap and Panasonic aren't too bad of a brand I guess.

Even on PC you won't get perfect 4k 60fps on all games at the moment and it will only get harder to reach that goal with current hardware, you have to essentially have 60 as the minimum to make it truly 60fps. Averaging 60fps is OK but if every time a big shoot out or explosion happens it drops to like 20-30 its not really solid 60fps.

PCs are going to jump well ahead of consoles faster this time, they are already ahead but in 3-4 years time they will truly be a generation ahead, so that is when solid 4k 60fps will be achievable presuming that devs don't shoddily port games with poor performance.

What graphics card and monitor is capable of 4K on the PC? I haven't seen any monitors advertised to do that resolution, only a couple of HDTV's.

HDTV in the UK is also very expensive I paid £500 for mine thats about $1000 in dollars.

I don't think 4k@60fpx will be available for at least 3 generations. Most people just bought their 720p/1080p TVs 6 years or so ago. Tons of people still don't have one of those. So I would say 10-12 years at least because people won't rush out to buy 4k TVs right now. Not even sure what their going rate is. Also, it would be helped along if TV standard/movie disc standard moved closer to 4k.

can PC do 4k 60 FPS yet? I had read that there was a few 4k TV's but they were limited to 30HZ or maybe it was the GPU's... Anyways I dont think 4K gaming will become mainstream anytime soon. We need monitors to be at least 1K, and GPU's to be a little bit more powerful.

@@

What makes you think that OLED and 4k will be mutually exclusive? (yeah ok I know you did not) but I think you will see that 4k will come around mostly tanks to OLED (if they make them last longer) Due to the ease of making such pixeldensity. Heck samsung phones will have 4k OLED in 2 years by their forecasts, so it is not unreasonable to consider that OLED will break through big time when 4k comes around (due to various reasons, ie. ease of pixel density as noted above, power consumption, weight and so on)

As for the TCs post, it is doable allready, but requires a really high end Card, Titalfall is reportedly playable in 4k at 60 fps on a single titan. mind you that IS a titan Card, so it is expensive, do notice that AMDs highend Card trades blows with the titan, and there is a very good possability that NeXT years high end Cards leaves the titan behind. So really all it comes Down to is the avaiability of 4k monitors, and cable to feed enough enformation through.

4k is some time away big time. you first need the chip makers make them at much cheaper rate. then t.v cost should crash for average consumer. then you need support because 1080p is nice and a lot of people is happy with that.

very far away for consoles... people who design consoles design it at an affordable price, Right now a 4k T.V and monitor are more expensive than a max out next gen PC. ( not most expensive PC you could build mind you )

Asus PQ321, PQ321Q,

Dell UP2414Q, P2814, UP3214Q

Viewsonic VP3280-LED

^To name a few

Dell is going to launch a 28 inch 4k Ultra HD monitor for under $1000 early next year. I'm thinking of upgrading to 4K by the end of 2014 or early 2015. Things are getting there.

1080p is becoming the poor man's resolution with monitors hitting the $100 mark with ease.

It's possible the next generation consoles will output games at native 4K, but not with 60fps also, unless that becomes a priority for some reason (not gonna happen). And then after all that there would be barely enough to also show any significant jump in core graphics whatsoever.

Much more likely is that games will be 2K (1440p) to also show another huge leap in core graphics, and also offer more 60fps games. And i'm sure Anti aliasing will almost be a mastered practice by then. By the 10th generation, I don't think games will need any anti aliasing.

Consoles have to be affordable. There are a few games that aren't 1080p 60fps on $400 and $500 consoles now. My PC with a $1000 GPU cannot max all games @ 1440p. There isn't a rig on the planet that can max games like Crysis 3 and BF4 @ 4K 60fps for under $5000. 4 GTX 780i cards can't even run BF4 maxed at 60fps. So my answer is more than 2 generations before that tech will be available at console prices.

very far most 4k tvs can only do 30fps at 4k

More on point, I wonder what selling gimmick manufacturers will create after 4k resolution becomes the norm in 5+ years?

It's completely pointless to increase resolution past 4k because you've reached the "infinite resolution" stage where the pixels are so small they are essentially "infinite".

As for the OP's question, we already have PCs capable of 4k, 60fps gaming. Yes, they are incredibly expensive but they exist.

Sow what's your actual question?

How long until the "average" gamer can play "most" games on "high settings" at 4k, 60fps? You must be more specific.

That's an impossible question to answer because it's totally dependent on where game developer's put their priorities in future games. If they keep increasing graphical techniques like better lighting, texture quality, pixel density on characters, etc...it's going to take a lot longer than if developers keep asset quality at around current levels and just focus on allowing for higher resolutions.

*looks at pc* there

I'd rather have better graphic effects and stay at 1080p, than have the same graphics at higher resolution

You can 4k game at 60fps with a lot of older games and a very high end PC now. They can do 4k @60fps for Star Citizen but it requires 4 titans in SLI.

It's possible but the cost is too great at the moment.

I don't think 4k will be the standards on PC for at least 5 years and maybe 10 years until we see it common on HDTVs. Lots of limitations with the amount of bandwidth needed for 4k. When countries still have internet bandwidth limits under 200 gigs a month, that poses a serious problems. Furthermore remastering something in 4k wouldn't look that great, a movie would need to be shot in 4k so I don't really see it taking over hollywood for a long time.

Seems to me that 4k will always be kind of be the realm of the high-end PC gamers who can afford the power it requires. I can't see console devs every trying to do 4k as it's just pointless in your typical living room situation where you're too far from the display to really see the difference between 4k and 1080p.

Games could do in-game super sampling to eliminate jaggies edges, but that's about it.

4k gaming will likely not be feasible for next-generation.

The next jump is 1440p.

Babysteps

It looks like some of those are 32", which is cool.

Dells will be 28" and 4k? That is pointless, you wont be able to resolve the extra resolution with that size screen, i think 32" is the minimum to be able to resolve extra resolution, and ideal would be 35-37"

as a "standard" 1440p is getting jumped

On PC you can do it now on many games. For more technologically advanced games, I'd say within the next 18 months it will be more realistic. In a few years, it'll be the standard on PC.

Not until the next generation for consoles, though.

PC gamers are already doing it. Console is gens behind as always..they're still playing catch up with 1080p 30 fps, and genres like MMO.

No, it will probably be able to render 1080p 60fps flawlessly, and struggle with 1440p.

4K is already on PC, and there's also 120fps gaming.

AMD R9 290X is capable. Can do 4K Gaming @ Ultra settings on BF3 at 40 FPS:

http://www.hardocp.com/article/2013/10/23/amd_radeon_r9_290x_video_card_review/14

That's with a single R9 290X. So single GPU wise, not that far.

That's what it looks like to me. I was in the market for a HDTV they didn't have any 1440P HDTV's. But they did have 4K HDTV's on display. It looked stunning.

On consoles it will take a long time until you can do so,on the PC you already can,though the cost is still generally high unless you´re doing it for somewhat older games.

How far are we from 4k gaming? We are already there on PC. How far are we from getting 4k gaming to the main stream? Until we can get hi-end PC hardwares for around or under the new consoles' price; from a consumer's standpoint, I'd say not close.

From a non-consumer's standpoint, until we can get super powerful workstations+softwares that's not more expensive than a small car with effortless storage management, I'm not quite looking forward to 4k yet.

It's still years away. Even high end cards can't get great frames on a 4k.

You might wanna do some looking into the r9 290x cards then.

Can already be achieved with regular off the shelf hardware. It just costs a lot as technology at the forefront always does.

@2ndwonder: Those don't even run all of the newest games now on 60 frames in 4k.

On consoles? Extremely far...

On PC? It's already arrived, will become mainstream in the next 2-3 years.

IMO irrelevant. I can see it working for PCs because you sit closer to the screen but even then it just seems overkill.

i think the ground work for 4k (not necessarily 60FPS) for consoles is being laid down now. nvidia and AMD have a new target and you can bet a lot of resources will be dedicated to hitting certain targets first.

by the end of next year (when the 390X and GTX 8XX series arrive) we should see the top single cards be able to have a very good stab at 4K at 30FPS in crysis 3. the 290X and 780 ti are not that far off.

by 2017 (i think its going to take a couple of shots) we should see the same feet accomplished with star citizen (which is going to be a very very demanding game by the looks of it).

the other challenge will also be getting the most demanding multiplats running at 4k at 30FPS but if a card can do star citizen at 4k 30FPS then chances are its going to be able to deal with any multiplat at those requirements.

2018-2020 will be back to excess horsepower territority which means, assuming a 7 year cycle for the PS4 and X1 (which admitedly is generous) the hardware required to drive a 4K screen at 30FPS with some pretty bleeding edge tech should be ready for consoles.

MS, sony and ninty will never demand that developers run their games at 4k and/or 60FPS though. the res and framerate will be left at the discretion of developers. so although the hardware on the PS5 and X2 will be capable of some very nice visuals at 4k/30fps the devs will cut back on the res to enhance the pretties and/or keep the framerate steady.

lets just hope internet connections can deal with the sheer size of these games :S.

thats whay my crystal ball tells me anyway :P.