4K users feedback

crinkleshoes · 2 Dec 2015 at 16:46

Yeah... 50" on a desk is absolutely absurd... that's the same as 4x 25" 1080p screens

To me... that makes 4k pointless... I wanted improved IQ, not just more workspace.

31.5" 4k is definitely the sweet spot for me on a desk... 27/28" and the text would be a bit too small to read comfortably at 100% scaling.

Change the scaling ratio away from 100% and the image degrades (with the exception of 200% - that ratio would look OK because it would use 2x2 (4) pixels in place of 1 pixel, so the scaling would work properly... but then it'd probably be best to just get a 32" 1080 screen

When 8k is released... I'm sure I'll be using that scaling ratio on a 31.5" or thereabouts screen size.

VincentHanna · 2 Dec 2015 at 16:52

Yeah 50" on a desk is silly.

My PC is connected to my 58" TV but if I use that for 4k gaming its from the sofa about 9ft away.

bemaniac · 3 Dec 2015 at 12:54

VincentHanna said:
Yeah 50" on a desk is silly.

My PC is connected to my 58" TV but if I use that for 4k gaming its from the sofa about 9ft away.

you're all wrong it's awesome!

Blackjack Davy · 3 Dec 2015 at 12:57

bemaniac said:
you're all wrong it's awesome!

So long as its in a 1920x1080 window in the middle of the screen with 6" black borders all around, amirite?

TNA · 3 Dec 2015 at 13:30

4K is excellent if you are not into competitive fps gaming as you are limited to 60Hz. You get all the eye candy instead.

The ideal size for 4K I think is 32" monitor. My next 4K monitor will be around that size and have more than 60Hz.

In the meantime I am still considering to pick up the Acer XF270HU which hits all the sweet spots with 1440P, IPS, 144Hz and decent Freesync range. Only thing stopping me right now from definitely getting it is it lacks ULMB (Ultra Low Motion Blur). I am thinking if I am going to drop back to a old resolution I had nearly a decade ago, I should get everything. But may still get it, as I find 27" to be too small for using 4K day to say at 100% scaling.

Dazboots · 3 Dec 2015 at 14:58

4k gaming here on a wasabi mango 42 inch monitor. has hdmi 2 and display port.
ips 60hz and free sync. crystal clear picture and blows my lg curved ultrawide out the water.
using a watercooled 3770k @ 4.6 ghz 16gb memory. ati 295x2 on water.

AWPC · 3 Dec 2015 at 16:00

bemaniac said:
you're all wrong it's awesome!

This x 1million. Scale is everything in modern games. I have both a 60" HDTV 1080 & 4K 40" neither seem big enough to me but then I have been PC gaming on 40" or larger displays for a decade now

Kaapstad · 3 Dec 2015 at 16:10

TNA said:
4K is excellent if you are not into competitive fps gaming as you are limited to 60Hz. You get all the eye candy instead.

The ideal size for 4K I think is 32" monitor. My next 4K monitor will be around that size and have more than 60Hz.

In the meantime I am still considering to pick up the Acer XF270HU which hits all the sweet spots with 1440P, IPS, 144Hz and decent Freesync range. Only thing stopping me right now from definitely getting it is it lacks ULMB (Ultra Low Motion Blur). I am thinking if I am going to drop back to a old resolution I had nearly a decade ago, I should get everything. But may still get it, as I find 27" to be too small for using 4K day to say at 100% scaling.

32" is nice

It is small enough to go on your desk and the text is big enough that you don't have to resize it for reading.

I hope Pascal and the next gen of cards can output at better than 60htz for 2160p.

bemaniac · 4 Dec 2015 at 10:03

AWPC said:
This x 1million. Scale is everything in modern games. I have both a 60" HDTV 1080 & 4K 40" neither seem big enough to me but then I have been PC gaming on 40" or larger displays for a decade now

Yay big screen bros

Seriously though a few feet from a phat 4k screen is where all that detail really pops.

JaFFa · 4 Dec 2015 at 10:13

Kaapstad said:
32" is nice

It is small enough to go on your desk and the text is big enough that you don't have to resize it for reading.

I hope Pascal and the next gen of cards can output at better than 60htz for 2160p.

Is 2160p 60hz 4:4:4 a limitation of the hdmi standard though ?

I've recently had some fun finding out that HDMI wires adont work at that spec if theya re longer than 7m. Shorter wire the better it seems at this res.

VincentHanna · 4 Dec 2015 at 10:15

It is.

But DisplayPort can go higher, so not a problem for Desktop PC monitors.

crinkleshoes · 4 Dec 2015 at 10:33

Current displayport can't go much higher than that though, can it?

Doesn't it require another updated DP/HDMI standard to increase that frequency by much?

Avenged7Fold · 4 Dec 2015 at 12:31

D.P

1.2[edit]
DisplayPort version 1.2 was approved on December 22, 2009. The most significant improvement of the new version is the doubling of the effective bandwidth to 17.28 Gbit/s in High Bit Rate 2 (HBR2) mode, which allows increased resolutions, higher refresh rates, and greater color depth. Other improvements include multiple independent video streams (daisy-chain connection with multiple monitors) called Multi-Stream Transport, facilities for stereoscopic 3D, increased AUX channel bandwidth (from 1 Mbit/s to 720 Mbit/s), more color spaces including xvYCC, scRGB and Adobe RGB 1998, and Global Time Code (GTC) for sub 1 µs audio/video synchronisation. Also Apple Inc.'s Mini DisplayPort connector, which is much smaller and designed for laptop computers and other small devices, is compatible with the new standard.[2][12][13][14]
1.2a[edit]
DisplayPort version 1.2a may optionally include VESA's Adaptive Sync.[15] AMD's FreeSync makes use of DisplayPort's capabilities; FreeSync was demonstrated at CES 2014[16] and later proposed VESA to standardize variable refresh rate features to DisplayPort standard.[17]
1.3[edit]
DisplayPort version 1.3 was approved on September 15, 2014.[18] This standard increases overall transmission bandwidth to 32.4 Gbit/s with the new HBR3 mode featuring 8.1 Gbit/s per lane (up from 5.4 Gbit/s with HBR2 in version 1.2), totalling 25.92 Gbit/s with overhead removed. This bandwidth allows for 5K displays (5120×2880 px) in RGB mode, and 8K UHDTV displays at 7680×4320 (16:9, 33.18 megapixels) using 4:2:0 subsampling at 60 Hz. The bandwidth also allows for two UHD (3840×2160 px) computer monitors at 60 Hz in 24-bit RGB mode using Coordinated Video Timing, a 4K stereo 3D display, or a combination of 4K display and USB 3.0 as allowed by DockPort. The new standard features HDMI 2.0 compatibility mode with HDCP 2.2 content protection. It also supports VESA Display Stream Compression, which uses a "visually lossless" low-latency algorithm based on predictive DPCM and YCoCg-R color space and allows increased resolutions and color depths and reduced power consumption.[19][20]

crinkleshoes · 4 Dec 2015 at 12:54

Woo... sounds like 120Hz 4k will be possible then

DP 1.3 isn't used anywhere yet, is it?

Avenged7Fold · 4 Dec 2015 at 12:58

Dont think so.

Surely if there isn't the suitable output from GPUs or suitable input port from monitors, then monitor manufacturers can just split the screen up into multiple monitors and jsut use multiple inputs.

TNA · 4 Dec 2015 at 13:55

Kaapstad said:
32" is nice

It is small enough to go on your desk and the text is big enough that you don't have to resize it for reading.

I hope Pascal and the next gen of cards can output at better than 60htz for 2160p.

Yeah, I agree. But unless multi gpu improves (for my taste anyway) I think it will be another 3 years for a singe gpu solution to output 120fps at 4K on latest games, maybe even longer.

This is not a problem for people who have patience and time to tinker with multi gpu, but I don't have that as much as I used to anymore. Never know though, DX12 may make multi-gpu a better proposition in a year or two, but I will not hold my breath

Kaapstad · 4 Dec 2015 at 14:28

TNA said:
Yeah, I agree. But unless multi gpu improves (for my taste anyway) I think it will be another 3 years for a singe gpu solution to output 120fps at 4K on latest games, maybe even longer.

Big Pascal won't be up to the job nor will big Volta so it could be nearer 5 years before a single GPU can output todays games @2160p/120fps.

Unfortunately in 5 years time games will be many times more demanding than they are now so multi GPUs will still be needed.

Yaayuh! · 4 Dec 2015 at 14:47

I'm more interested in there being something widely used between TN and IPS that has decent response times, viewing angles and colour. 120hz would be lovely, but i would prefer the panel quality first.

I want to get a G-Sync UHD monitor but there's just nothing out there worth buying IMO, i'm willing to pay around £500

Retron · 4 Dec 2015 at 18:09

Rossi~ said:
I want to get a G-Sync UHD monitor but there's just nothing out there worth buying IMO, i'm willing to pay around £500

I bought an Acer XB280HK last year (the first 4K G-sync monitor) and I couldn't be happier with it - there's no discernable lag, viewing angles are great (far better than any other TN I've had) and the G-sync bit means games are lovely and smooth. Windows 10 looks superb in 4K and I've not had any problems with dodgy scaling.

The only downside I've found is that it doesn't support HDCP 2.2, meaning I won't be able to watch 4K blu-rays on it next year - at least, not unless the protection is hacked!

Going back to regular HD at work (on a 27" screen rather than the 28" 4K screen I have here) is like looking at Lego bricks in comparison.

TNA · 4 Dec 2015 at 19:20

Kaapstad said:
Big Pascal won't be up to the job nor will big Volta so it could be nearer 5 years before a single GPU can output todays games @2160p/120fps.

Unfortunately in 5 years time games will be many times more demanding than they are now so multi GPUs will still be needed.

Well let us hope multi gpu improves by then. In the mean time, maybe it is wise I just stick with what I got. I have always been happy with 60hz I do not play online fps games. But if I go 144hz now, I may spoil being able to fully enjoy 60hz like I do now. This will make going back to 4k harder.

4k at 60hz should be a piece of cake for big pascal, hell even small pascal may do a decent job until big pascal is out.

What do you personally prefer, 4K 60Hz or 1440p 144Hz?