• 10K gaming at 120Hz will be possible with HDMI 2.1—but not for a while
    36 replies, posted
[QUOTE=J!NX;52947814]I'm at 100% scaled and having no issues at all on a 27 inch monitor. Scaling up doesn't make anything blurry for me soooo I have no idea what the hell is happening on your PC but that don't happen here. i know it doesn't because I have 2 of the exact same monitors and one is scaled up 175% with literally no side effects outside of big ass text.[/quote] Photoshop at 150% scaling [t]https://i.imgur.com/Wz488Q6.png[/t] Explorer at 150% scaling [t]https://i.imgur.com/rOYUiSe.png[/t] At 100% scale, which is really really small, it looks and works fine. [QUOTE=J!NX;52947814] This is just objectively wrong. You can reduce useless settings like Anti-aliasing, SSAO, etc, and still get the desired effect. I do this with every game before I even run them, and I manage to get most games I play at 4k on max on my gtx1080. I know this because I do it. If you reduce a few settings you can still get the desired 60fps with not that much of a noticable issue, and if you REALLY needed to run it at 1440p. it's kind of dumb to point out the processing power needed to get 4k when 144hz doesn't even work on many games because of caps, and even then you have the issue of it getting to a stable framerate. You can easily run a game at only 100 fps and enjoy the benefits and you can easily run it in 1440p and enjoy the benefits. Both need a lot of proccessing power, don't pretend that 144hz is immune to that problem by bringing this up. [/quote] AA, and SSAO are huge settings and can have a dramatic impact on image quality. Especially AA. I'm rocking a GTX1070 and an i7-7700k, but still struggle to get 4k 60 in a lot of games without bastardizing the graphics settings a ton. Sub pixels don't really make a huge difference when you can get ultra settings at 1080p Also, at 1440, it's 1.5x the size of 1080p, so you get a LESS sharper image than 1080 or 4k due to the half-pixel. Even if you don't quite reach 144hz 90 fps still feels much much smoother and better to play with compared to 60, or even worse, 30. A lot of games already run above 60 even on mid-range hardware. [QUOTE=J!NX;52947814]That's a completely subjective matter really. With a higher resolution I can fit way more information on screen with far higher detail. I have literally no use in it feeling 'fast and responsive' when text doesn't fly around constantly. If I was playing Dusk or Doom though I'd choose 144hz any day, but for me choosing framerate for... looking at text is just massively redundant. Yeah its smoother, but at 1080p it also looks blurry as fuck compared to 4k. Reading text with a higher framerate is generally useless because it makes it look better while you're moving anything around, not when its stationary. Its a matter of looking better in motion VS looking better in detail. I'll totally agree that no doubt though 144hz is superior in many ways to anything that will be at 60hz, it's definitely waaaay cleaner when anything on screen is moving.[/quote] 90% of games involve a lot of movement. That extra boost in motion makes a huge difference. And while there might be more information, how much of it is actually useable? 4k monitors have smaller pixels, so while there is more information, it's the same size to your eye. [QUOTE=J!NX;52947814] [editline]5th December 2017[/editline] I've played GTA5 in 4k at a stable 60, I've played it with a high HZ monitor, I've played it with 1080p at a low framerate. I've played it with really all monitor set ups out there. I still preferred 4k because I want to see that nice crystal clean shit with no aliasing and crisp lines. I'd probably choose 1440p at 144hz over 4k however because that gives you both options and just objectively improves it both ways.[/quote] 1440p is nice, 100% isn't too small. 4k is just in general too large at this point in time, and a lot of programs don't quite support ui scaling well. For TVs, 4k is a good size since the screen is much larger, and pushing 4k video compared to a 4k game is way less demanding. Also, if you have to downscale to 1440 to get 60, you're not going to get unaliased pictures. Also my monitor. [url]https://www.amazon.com/Samsung-U28E590D-28-Inch-LED-Lit-Monitor/dp/B00YD3DBOC[/url] tl;dr thoughts, 4k is nice, but not really a game changer. There's a lot of space, but at the only non-broken UI scale of 100%, it's too small. Also I'm typing this on my 4k monitor and it's not really fun as the text is really small.
[QUOTE=Stiffy360;52946020]Why buy a 4k monitor when you can get a nicer 1080p monitor for the same price. Like, right now I prefer to use my 1080p 144hz monitor over my 4k monitor due to how responsive and crisp it is. Also, 4k for computers doesn't really work well, and for games even less so.[/QUOTE] Objectively false. "I haven't used it, so I don't know it's about" is not any flavor of objective. Using 4K with hardware that doesn't run it well isn't doing you any favors.
[QUOTE=27X;52947888]Objectively false. "I haven't used it, so I don't know it's about" is not any flavor of objective. Using 4K with hardware that doesn't run it well isn't doing you any favors.[/QUOTE] I have a 28" 4k monitor with an i7-7700k as well as a gtx 1070. I've actually used the monitor and have hardware somewhat capable of handling it. I also go into detail in my thoughts just one post above yours.
10K at 120Hz, neat, meanwhile you still can't find any 4K 144Hz monitors available for purchase, and the ones coming out "soon" will use compression (even if it's lossless it's gonna introduce some lag) to achieve that anyway
[QUOTE=Stiffy360;52947875]Photoshop at 150% scaling [t]https://i.imgur.com/Wz488Q6.png[/t] Explorer at 150% scaling [t]https://i.imgur.com/rOYUiSe.png[/t] At 100% scale, which is really really small, it looks and works fine.[/QUOTE] Weird as fuck, this doesn't seem like an issue with me at all. Probably a bug because everything scales correctly. Windows is a fucked OS at times but I assure you that this is not supposed to happen at all. [URL="http://www.thewindowsclub.com/disable-font-smoothing-windows"]This may also help[/URL], turn cleartype off and adjust performance options, should be all you need. Windows is really dumb about their features. [t]https://i.imgur.com/C1bImQU.png[/t][t]https://i.imgur.com/yBi3QU2.png[/t][t]https://i.imgur.com/Scp3MQL.png[/t] What mine looks like at 300, 150, and 100. I have none of the blur issues you are having so maybe I just got luck of the draw. Text just looks great at 4k. I suggest also editing settings on the monitor, and getting sharpness to 50% or whatever looks cleanest. a 4k monitor looks like shit when you have a brand with messed up factory default settings. Google the best settings for your brand and adjust both monitors accordingly, because all monitors, including a 144hz and 4k and 8k&240hz monitor alike can be ruined by bad factory default settings. [QUOTE=Stiffy360;52947875] AA, and SSAO are huge settings and can have a dramatic impact on image quality. Especially AA.[/QUOTE] Anti Aliasing is something that is huge for 1080p monitors because they suffer from Aliasing. You won't need to use or even notice AA in 4k because the smaller pixels mean that Aliasing is nearly negligable. The only way that you can actually use AA and see a difference with 4k is if you use above 16x AA or put your face directly on your screen. I kind of doubt you have done much gaming in 4k at all because you can easily find this out. SSAO looks like shit in many games and can even kill performance, in most games it almost doesn't even change anything. In Talos Princible I can go from above 60fps to a solid 30 shitfest on absolute max. In some games however, the opposite happens and it makes it look way better without killing framerate. Results carry. [QUOTE=Stiffy360;52947875]I'm rocking a GTX1070 and an i7-7700k, but still struggle to get 4k 60 in a lot of games without bastardizing the graphics settings a ton. Even if you don't quite reach 144hz 90 fps still feels much much smoother and better to play with compared to 60, or even worse, 30. A lot of games already run above 60 even on mid-range hardware.[/QUOTE] 4k can't run perfectly every time on all games, but why is it ok if you only get 90fps and not the full 144hz? That is selective as fuck and unfair, if you're going to deny resolution a certain standard then you should also criticize Hz for not running in peak form on every game. [URL="https://babeltechreviews.com/titan-x-vs-gtx-1080-25-games-tested-4k-2k-1440p/3/"]Nearly all games run above 1080p on mid range hardware, and many run at 4k just fine[/URL], the key with this list is of course at least 55fps stable, almost all can get at least 1440p, and I would consider that equal to 90hz on the topic of resolution. I would like to point out that before my gtx1080 I had a 970, and I could run plenty of games on suprising settings. You should be able to run run almost all older games in 4k with your 1070 on max, just like older games would run at a perfect 144hz even at 1440dsr at 1080p. As for comparing 144hz to 60hz, really no one sane will doubt that 144hz will feel better. This is like comparing 2160p to 1080p, obviously in looks, the higher resolution is the victor. Obviously, in response time and gameplay, 144hz is better than 60hz, and therefore for that topic better than 4k, I'm just saying that personally I prefer the aesthetic detail of 4k/2160p, and I'm willing to suffer 60hz for it. With a normal 1080p monitor you get less crisp detail and suffer more aliasing even with DSR and AA combined. [QUOTE=Stiffy360;52947875]at 1440, it's 1.5x the size of 1080p, so you get a LESS sharper image than 1080 or 4k due to the half-pixel.[/QUOTE] This doesn't even make any sense. 4k is generally refered to as 3840x2160p, which is four times the resolution of 1080p. So obviously 1440p doesn't look as sharp as 4k, it's a lower resolution. It can't look better on its own. Maybe on some monitors lowering the resolution below native looks bad, but a native 1440p is in between the two. [QUOTE=Stiffy360;52947875]90% of games involve a lot of movement. That extra boost in motion makes a huge difference. And while there might be more information, how much of it is actually useable? 4k monitors have smaller pixels, so while there is more information, it's the same size to your eye..[/QUOTE] I'll agree that again, no doubt 144hz is superior in many ways to anything that will be at 60hz, it's definitely waaaay cleaner when anything on screen is moving. Yes it makes a huge difference. Of course it makes a huge difference. But I don't run a high resolution because I want more usable frames, I run it because I want my games to have no aliasing and I want to see more sexies. [QUOTE=Stiffy360;52947875] tl;dr thoughts, 4k is nice, but not really a game changer. There's a lot of space, but at the only non-broken UI scale of 100%, it's too small. Also I'm typing this on my 4k monitor and it's not really fun as the text is really small.[/QUOTE] I only use 4k monitors, and the text isn't small to me because I scale it with zooms. We both really have the same monitor, only difference is mine is an inch shorter and an ASUS. I prefer 4k over 144hz for sure but I'm sure both of us would agree that 1440p at even a mere 100hz should be a universal standard. Better resolution than 1080p and smoother than 2160p. You don't have the bullshit feel of 60hz and the image is cleaned up. PERSONALLY, I went with 144hz first, and bought a 4k monitor later, I adjusted my eyes by using 1080p at 4x DSR (2160p) and once I got the 4k monitor and adjusted it it was instantly far cleaner and better looking, and it wasn't as smooth in motion as the 144hz however I ended up liking it over it. I wish my 144hz didn't break though cause I'm mad as fuck that I played Dusk Episode 1 at 60hz, since Hz for gameplay is just nicer in many ways.
To clarify, 1440p on a 4k monitor looks a bit gross. On a native 1440p monitor it looks good. 1 pixel with 1080 is 4 pixels in 4k while 1 pixel in 1440 is something like 1.5^2. When you upscale that you introduce stepping artifacts since the monitor can’t display a half pixel. 1440 is a great standard and fairly achievable on most hardware. I’ll look into clear-type and that stuff. Thanks for the info.
[QUOTE=Stiffy360;52948475]1440 is a great standard and fairly achievable on most hardware. I’ll look into clear-type and that stuff. Thanks for the info.[/QUOTE] that is for sure yeah, consoles for example are shooting for 4K purely because of the buzz word of it, while it is a great resolution they are shooting for a very difficult goal for consoles if it went for 1440p they probably would have an easy time but instead they go for something the requires the best hardware
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.