4k gaming is Dumb

yea but those ones are crap compared to the more expensive ones, I'd rather pay the same money for a better lower res screen

to each their own of course, this is obviously an opinion piece, not a rule everyone must follow :)
 
Linus is just trying to cement himself in whatever fame he already has gained he has probably the biggest tek following out there.
I do like smaller screens myself for gaming basically went from 27" down to 24" but I think 25" would be the perfect sweet spot.
Bigger screens are nicer for some FPS but I can't stand them for RPG games.
 
Verge said:
How is this moron popular, I refuse to click any links because I don't want to contribute to his views.
Click to expand...

The same reason that retards like that pewdiepie guy are popular?

But you have to look at it from a different perspective: I tend to think of people like linus, jayz2cents, ijustine (cringeworthy apple shill girl), etc as good well put together production content for entertainment with little technical value- their target audience not necessarily being hardcore tech savvy people. You have to appreciate the effort that they put into their production value, not informational value. So I would mostly use their videos to see how something looks -sort of for only the unboxing content. Other than that, Linus is a good guy and he's doing something right which is why he's had the success he has.
 
why are kids so popular? they don't know shit and are annoying to boot... boot over a fence :D

seriously though, he's maybe like the bob vila of tech reviewers, smart enough to fumble around with this stuff, but "innocent" enough to ask questions and appeal to a more mainstream audience

of course for folks here we might just need someone more serious... or [h]ard ;)
 
TheMadHatterXxX said:
The same reason that retards like that pewdiepie guy are popular?

But you have to look at it from a different perspective: I tend to think of people like linus, jayz2cents, ijustine (cringeworthy apple shill girl), etc as good well put together production content for entertainment with little technical value- their target audience not necessarily being hardcore tech savvy people. You have to appreciate the effort that they put into their production value, not informational value. So I would mostly use their videos to see how something looks -sort of for only the unboxing content. Other than that, Linus is a good guy and he's doing something right which is why he's had the success he has.
Click to expand...

I think most are just better at making clickbait thumbnails... something this guy has perfected. Unfortunately all these ppl are fads, the new boy bands. After their audience grows up they'll die off.

Pdp has actually changed his channel significantly over the years, i think he understands he has to change as his core audience ages or become irrelevant.
 
Verge said:
I think most are just better at making clickbait thumbnails... something this guy has perfected. Unfortunately all these ppl are fads, the new boy bands. After their audience grows up they'll die off.

Pdp has actually changed his channel significantly over the years, i think he understands he has to change as his core audience ages or become irrelevant.
Click to expand...


With pew die pie the damage has been done. I think he needs therapy he's way too big for his own good.
 
My Acer Predator 2560 x 1440 144 Hz monitor just arrived yesterday. I'll hopefully find out tonight. Should be a nice upgrade from my 1920 x 1200 60 Hz monitor. I'll hold out on 4K for now.
 
kamikazi said:
My Acer Predator 2560 x 1440 144 Hz monitor just arrived yesterday. I'll hopefully find out tonight. Should be a nice upgrade from my 1920 x 1200 60 Hz monitor. I'll hold out on 4K for now.
Click to expand...

144hz jump is huge from 60hz

I used to run a 85hz CRT was so much better than my 60hz lcd
 
Armenius said:
You know you can get a 4K monitor for $200 these days. You can get a very large 4K TV for $300.
Click to expand...

I can't find any 4k monitors for $200 NIB price, even refurbs are more than that. You can get low grade ones for $300, but nothing quality, something like Dell's S line. That aside the issue is also GPU performance. Even a 1080Ti struggles at 4k, but does well at 2.5k. If resolution is the be-all, end-all for you then ok, but appreciate that for many people it is NOT and that's what the video is about. Yes, I've seen 4k on a large screen, I have a nice Vizio P65-F1 TV, and I've wired it to my computer. Guess what? I'd rather game at 1080p120 on it than 4k60, even assuming my GPU can handle 60fps in a game at 4k. The higher rez is nice, but the higher FPS is nicer. I'd take 2.5k120 if the TV would accept it but it won't. On my computer though I have a 2.5k monitor that's do Gsync up to 165Hz and that is what I'd most prefer. Means I have nice smooth framerates and reasonably high resolution.

It's fine that you don't wish to make the same choice.
 
I switched over to a 144hz monitor last year. Been wanting one for since the CRT days when I'd play lower resolutions just for the high refresh rates. If you're even remotely competitive and haven't switched to 144hz+ yet, then you're doing yourself a disservice. I figure the sweet spot is 2k 144hz but pushing that can get pricey on the video cards so I went with 1080p 144hz. I understand the appeal of 4k 60hz but I just stopped resolution whoring years ago.
 
bboynitrous said:
I switched over to a 144hz monitor last year. Been wanting one for since the CRT days when I'd play lower resolutions just for the high refresh rates. If you're even remotely competitive and haven't switched to 144hz+ yet, then you're doing yourself a disservice. I figure the sweet spot is 2k 144hz but pushing that can get pricey on the video cards so I went with 1080p 144hz. I understand the appeal of 4k 60hz but I just stopped resolution whoring years ago.
Click to expand...

I'd argue it is something great even if you aren't competitive. I don't do online shooties anymore, I can't due to RSI but I am still a massive high framerate fan. Even in strategy games or just on the desktop, the fluidness and responsiveness is really nice.
 
Comixbooks said:
With pew die pie the damage has been done. I think he needs therapy he's way too big for his own good.
Click to expand...

He does need therapy and he tends to be an example of "look, gamers are actually this bad and fucked up look at this freak" all to often.

Sycraft said:
I'd argue it is something great even if you aren't competitive. I don't do online shooties anymore, I can't due to RSI but I am still a massive high framerate fan. Even in strategy games or just on the desktop, the fluidness and responsiveness is really nice.
Click to expand...

Yeah, this is it. It's sort of like the SSD vs HDD argument. Sure, you get more with an HDD but it's less responsive. The thing is, it doesn't seem that noticable until you use something that is just that responsive, and then you realize all the flaws in a slower system. If you've used one of those screens that does shit out 144/165/180/240hz with a 1ms response time and had a system that could keep up to it than going back to 4k 60hz even with 60fps along with the delay inherent in large TVs feels slow and ugly. It's like going from running on a track in track cleats and then being forced to trudge through knee deep mud in waist high boots.

You can (sort of) make an argument that the gains between 144/165/180/240hz aren't as jaw dropping as moving from 60hz up to 144hz. They are, but it's not as much of an "omg where have you been all might life" moment. Just as the gains from dropping from a 4ms IPS panel to 1ms TN panel aren't as big as dropping from a 12ms panel down to a 4ms panel, though that is still there as well.

They are good for fighting games as well.
 
I can't do 1080p, its so much garbage.

My primary monitor is 3440/1440 and that is bare minimum for me. I 4k game on a 60" Samsung JS9000 (just like Kyle I see) and OMG it is the balls, love every second of it.

Verge said:
I think most are just better at making clickbait thumbnails... something this guy has perfected. Unfortunately all these ppl are fads, the new boy bands. After their audience grows up they'll die off.

Pdp has actually changed his channel significantly over the years, i think he understands he has to change as his core audience ages or become irrelevant.
Click to expand...

It makes me sad, because it highlights how dumb my generation can be, and that we give these idiots a platform and huge amounts of money to spout off like morons.
 
Last edited:
Ha, I am not much of a TV/youtube person but this Linus guy has definitely grown on me after that monitor test. Sure they are all the same. I hope it's not staged to make us refresh rate whores feel better.
 
Comixbooks said:
Click to expand...


It's pretty hard to take the comments from a guy with that facial expression seriously. On any level. As for the comments themselves, I couldn't disagree more. Gaming on my 49" Samsung KS8500 kicks ass. Its far more immersive than any sub-40" or ultra-wide format display I've ever tried.
 
I didnt watch the video, so I hope its tongue in cheek.

I play on a 50" screen. Anything less than 4k is shit as fuck on it. I've been running 1920x1200 on 24"ers since 2007, so I sure as shit expect to be at a higher resolution these days, large screen size or not - I would expect a new 24" to be higher resolution as well.. Not staying stagnant.

When I dont have my 50" screen (Like I didnt when I just moved for a few weeks) I still play at 4k using the nVidia super resolution and downscaling to get a stupidly smooth picture on the 1920x1200 displays.
 
BladeDancer314 said:
No way!!!!

I can't go back to 60fps, I have 144 and 200 hz monitors, I'd rather sacrifice resolution and other picture quality to make sure I stay in the 144fps neighborhood
Click to expand...

I'm the other way on it. I won't sacrifice image quality, or size for frame rates. Obviously, I don't want to drop below 60FPS.
 
After watching Linus's vids, I wonder why Kyle doesn't go all full video on us.

He's never looked as bad a Linus does; I saw a video f him and hos bro's doing a made from scratch heatsink, and is was SO wrong, it wasn't even watchable.

No shit it didn't work; you did every step wrong. WTF...
 
You're all dumb. 640x480 on a CRT is where it's at. The human eye can't see jagged edges smaller than that.
 
I stopped watching Linus videos because he's a sellout with a shit ton of ads.
I also don't see how 4k gaming is stupid. Unless he thinks that only 20xx cards can run 4k games. 1080Ti is good enough and next gen will be a better investment.
60hz is more than enough for gaming. Sorry trigger happy kids, but upgrading from 60hz to 120hz is not as big deal as upgrading from 30hz to 60hz. Especially not for gamers like me. And I have a 120hz screen. 4k all the way.
 
I think that regardless of resolution/refresh/response specs the panel quality has a lot to do with it along with whatever hardware is paired to it. With virtually endless combinations it easy to pair high end hardware to a low end panel and say it looks like crap and vice versa. Sometimes you get lucky and it's all good from the get go. So arguing 1080p vs 1440p vs 4k is very relative to how you do it.

Two of the most expensive and frequent upgrades I do are displays and GPU's. My family mostly loves when I upgrade a display because they know a nifty hand-me-down will follow suit. Consequently I've had a lot of displays over the last 10 years.

I began designing my 4k rig(the one in my signature) about 3-5 years ago and have upgraded as need be. First 4k display for was a 10bit RGB 31.5" LG 4096x2160 60hz 99% Adobe RGB monitor. Crisp and beautiful and amazing colors. The next was a HiSense 55" 4k/HDR. It was the first HDR in the house and at $450 a steal about 2-3 years ago. I was never totally happy with it and the colors never seemed quite right. Despite much tweaking it too also had some HDMI color compression issues which in turn caused some FPS problems. I'd seen this phenomenon with some 1080p T.V's over the years. Basically if your display can't do true RGB 8bit full color or 4:4:4 same then it's likely you'll lose frames as the GPU compresses color. A couple of weeks ago a t.v. I've been eyeing for 2 years finally dropped to an affordable price, $2000, for me. It's a Sony Z9D 65" 4k. Some reviews mentioned significant motion blur but maybe I got lucky because we haven't noticed it. It's a 2016 model that's still in production from Sony and can offer over 1000nits and often listed as one of the best LEDs vs OLED. The Samsung JS900 is a better choice for gaming because of motion response but Z9D is the rare beast of 4k/3d/Active Shutter glasses. After a lot of tweaking on the t.v. it's displaying at 4096x2160 8 bit RGB BT.2020 60hz HDR10 and looks friggin' amazing. It looks so good that I've actually disconnected all other monitors and use it exclusively now. Factor in the Strix 2080TI on order and this tv plus the rig and the costs are around $5000-6000. For the average gamer-no. Do I think it's amazing and love it-hell yes!

My other rig(in my profile) was first put together around 7 years ago for high end 1080p/120hz/3d gaming. Since then it's been upgraded with a Strix 1080TI and paired to a Asus 27" 144hz 3d 1440p G-Sync. To me a perfect match up with most games rendering 80-120fps in ultra. This is my go to when I just want the high FPS smooth experience but in comparison to the 4k rig the visuals are night and day. GPU price gouging aside someone could probably put together a rig(w/ display) for around $2000-3000 or maybe less. Average gamer-debatable but most would enjoy the experience.

Bottom line, it's what you can afford vs. what is truly enjoyable. That's not the same for everyone. Single and selfish perspectives are dumb.
 
THRESHIN said:
You're all dumb. 640x480 on a CRT is where it's at. The human eye can't see jagged edges smaller than that.
Click to expand...
I get the best mouse response in CS 1.6 using a CRT at 640×480 with vsync disabled on a GTX 1080. Flat panel screens will never have the response that a proper CRT will. /s
 
djoye said:
I get the best mouse response in CS 1.6 using a CRT at 640×480 with vsync disabled on a GTX 1080. Flat panel screens will never have the response that a proper CRT will. /s
Click to expand...

Can't you at least do 1024x768 at super high Hz??

640x480 is just vicious lol
 
djoye said:
I get the best mouse response in CS 1.6 using a CRT at 640×480 with vsync disabled on a GTX 1080. Flat panel screens will never have the response that a proper CRT will. /s
Click to expand...

The radiation also enhances your reflexes. You'll be able to eat doritos with no lag.
 
Nebell said:
I stopped watching Linus videos because he's a sellout with a shit ton of ads.
I also don't see how 4k gaming is stupid. Unless he thinks that only 20xx cards can run 4k games. 1080Ti is good enough and next gen will be a better investment.
60hz is more than enough for gaming. Sorry trigger happy kids, but upgrading from 60hz to 120hz is not as big deal as upgrading from 30hz to 60hz. Especially not for gamers like me. And I have a 120hz screen. 4k all the way.
Click to expand...

No.
 
Nebell said:
1080Ti is good enough and next gen will be a better investment.
Click to expand...
Yeah, no. 1080 Ti sucks at 4K compared to my 2080 TI. No way good enough.

And there's always a "next-gen", that's always a "better investment". PC parts are not investments. So much wrong with your post.
 
Brahmzy said:
Yeah, no. 1080 Ti sucks at 4K compared to my 2080 TI. No way good enough.

And there's always a "next-gen", that's always a "better investment". PC parts are not investments. So much wrong with your post.
Click to expand...

Wrong. 2080Ti is not as big as an upgrade your conscience is telling you it is.
You've spent a ton of money for 10 fps increase. I guess some people sleep better when they tell themselves that their money spend was worth it.
It wasn't.
 
From my view point. 4k gaming + big tv screen = Just makes sense. 1440p gaming on 27-32 monitor makes an equal amount of sense. Do I drool over those 4k monitors, sure do. I game on 1080p monitors and a 4k tv when I want a bit more.
 
Nebell said:
Wrong. 2080Ti is not as big as an upgrade your conscience is telling you it is.
You've spent a ton of money for 10 fps increase. I guess some people sleep better when they tell themselves that their money spend was worth it.
It wasn't.
Click to expand...
Once again, you’ve proven you have no idea what you’re talking about. It is clear you have a personal issue, either jealousy or some butthurt, against 2080 TIs and their owners.
You provide no facts, just constant negativity. Meanwhile, we’re all enjoying our 2080 TIs as they are the absolute best experience with 4K, by far. 30%-40% over 1080 TI on average.
 
Nebell said:
Wrong. 2080Ti is not as big as an upgrade your conscience is telling you it is.
You've spent a ton of money for 10 fps increase. I guess some people sleep better when they tell themselves that their money spend was worth it.
It wasn't.
Click to expand...
You are absolutely wrong. I specifically and only upgraded to a 2080ti from a 1080ti because it provided far more than a 10fps increase @ 4K.

The difference between the two cards at 4k is enough that it makes most games maintain 60fps+ where as the 1080ti just simply wasn't enough.

I agree that the 2080ti is way too expensive, and it has some serious quality issues right now - But at the end of the day nothing competes with it. If you need that 40% frame rate increase over a 1080ti there isn't a choice.

BTW - I sleep fine regardless if that $1200 was wasted or not. For me personally, it's a drop in a bucket. I know that's a hard concept for some folks to understand, but some of us have a substantial income to waste on something like a 2080ti. You can keep thinking the way you do, but i'll tell you this; Even if the 2080ti was only 10FPS faster across the board @ 4k I would still have bought it no problem. 10 FPS is 10 FPS and i'm willing to pay to play.
 
Mchart said:
You are absolutely wrong. I specifically and only upgraded to a 2080ti from a 1080ti because it provided far more than a 10fps increase @ 4K.

The difference between the two cards at 4k is enough that it makes most games maintain 60fps+ where as the 1080ti just simply wasn't enough.

I agree that the 2080ti is way too expensive, and it has some serious quality issues right now - But at the end of the day nothing competes with it. If you need that 40% frame rate increase over a 1080ti there isn't a choice.

BTW - I sleep fine regardless if that $1200 was wasted or not. For me personally, it's a drop in a bucket. I know that's a hard concept for some folks to understand, but some of us have a substantial income to waste on something like a 2080ti. You can keep thinking the way you do, but i'll tell you this; Even if the 2080ti was only 10FPS faster across the board @ 4k I would still have bought it no problem. 10 FPS is 10 FPS and i'm willing to pay to play.
Click to expand...

I mostly agree with this. It's not quite a drop in the bucket for me but it is my only alternative to finally escape SLI. I've been proud of what I've achieved over the last 10 years with it but really looking forward to being back to one card again and this is the only way for the mostly 60fps/4k experience at ultra.

The 'is it worth it or blank blank is dumb' argument is old. I remember back in the early 2000's hearing the same for 1080p. It's only been in the last 5-6 years I've mostly stopped hearing it for 1080p. The only thing that really changed in that time frame was 30fps vs 60fps vs 120fps vs 144fps or more. Every couple of years from 2000 on the specs made jumps and then people argued whether it really mattered. That hasn't changed either. So people pissing on 4k will see the same for 8k and more. No reason it should change.
 
Fully happy gaming at 4K @ 60fps on my 49" Samsung. Way happier with this than a higher Hz display (which i've had). I am not a competitive gamer. I play games to enjoy them. I don't need a faster refresh monitor. And no, 4K gaming is not dumb.
 
So as it happens, ol' Sonicks here picked himself up a 4K 55'' TV on black Friday and...

Well, the screen itself is amazing even when the compromises are taken into account (it's not the highest end 4K TV by any means). Gaming Gears of War 4, Forza 7, and Forza Horizon 3 in 4K is an absolute treat. BUT! The rest of my games that I can only play at 1440p also look tremendous such as Shadow of the Tomb Raider, Rise of the Tomb Raider, Battlefield V, and others.

Honestly, I see the clarity that 4K offers without a doubt but a 55'' screen, when viewed from over 5' away, there is little to no difference between a 1440p upscale to 4K and a native 4K image to my eye. There isn't any blurryness going on. I even tried A/B testing Rise of the Tomb Raider and found almost no discernible difference when played at 1440 or 4K on this same TV set.

No matter a 1440p upscale or a native 4K, this thing is a beast and I'm having too much fun replaying games in such a large scale.
 
Last edited:
I played on a 1440P 27" over the holiday weekend and realized there's no way I can go back to that after playing on my X27, didn't think it would bother me that much.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top