Has anyone made the jump to 4k PC gaming?

G

guitarguy6

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Oct 29, 2007
Messages
1,948
Hey guys, now that the Samsung U28D590D is out I'm tempted to ditch my eyefinity for a 4k display. Does anyone have a 4k display for PC gaming? Thoughts?
 
Too expensive right now I've decided. I'm not that happy with any of the 4k display options and man does it take some heavy GPU power to drive it well.

So I'm sticking at 2.5k for now.
 
Personally I would wait for the Dispalyport 1.3 standard to come out this year and get a monitor then.
 
While a really cool idea, there are just too many things keeping me from it.
The display standards are still a little shaky and you're pre-committing to buying some pretty hefty hardware to power it. Either that or you're going to have to get used to turning the details down and fine tuning performance a lot.
 
I'll jump in when single card GPU can drive 4K resolution at near 60 fps with support for HDMI 2.0 and DP 1.3 at 60Hz and OLED 4K 60Hz panels are available but am willing to compromise for equivalent LCD.

On a side note, wasn't impressed with first generation OLED TV I saw the other day at Fry's. It lacked the WOW factor along with skin tone appearing too pinkish.
 
I'm far more interested in GSync than 4K. Its going to be a while before 4K monitors are feasible for gaming, meaning that they become a little more widespread to the point they start making some with gaming in mind. The input latency on the current offerings is less than good.
 
I made the jump to 4K digital circuit design, but they wont let me play games at work so I guess no :)
 
DPI said:
I'm far more interested in GSync than 4K. Its going to be a while before 4K monitors are feasible for gaming, meaning that they become a little more widespread to the point they start making some with gaming in mind. The input latency on the current offerings is less than good.
Click to expand...

This has been my thoughts also.
I'm just getting tired of waiting on Asus to release the ROG SWIFT PG278Q (27" 1440p/144hz/g-sync). I almost said screw it and bought one of those Samsung 4k screens, but there were none in stock for Amazon Prime or I'd probably have pulled the trigger.

I would hold off on 4K gaming for a while longer, as more monitors come out and the technology matures, things will get better and hopefully prices come down some more.
 
Are there any other monitors that will be out in the future that offer 4k @ 60HZ for $600? That's why I feel like grabbing the U28D590D. It seems like a steal for $600 and when there are better options out I can always sell the monitor and upgrade.
 
DraginDime said:
This has been my thoughts also.
I'm just getting tired of waiting on Asus to release the ROG SWIFT PG278Q (27" 1440p/144hz/g-sync).
Click to expand...

That's exactly the monitor I was going to buy next.

And not only does the price-performance ratio on 4K monitors have to come down, but we need the next generation of GPU to drive them without having to resort to multiple cards. I'd want at least a GTX 880 before I'd consider a 4K screen.
 
guitarguy6 said:
Are there any other monitors that will be out in the future that offer 4k @ 60HZ for $600? That's why I feel like grabbing the U28D590D. It seems like a steal for $600 and when there are better options out I can always sell the monitor and upgrade.
Click to expand...


The Samsung U28D590D is actually $699 MSRP or simply ~$700 USD not $600.

As for upcoming 4K monitors with similar specs and price, there is the upcoming Lenovo ThinkVision Pro2840m and Asus PB287Q. I believe the Lenovo is due out this month. However both the Lenovo and the Asus are presumably targeting a slightly higher end of the market by including amenities like a USB hub, adjustable stand and so on, things not seen on the relatively barebones Samsung U28D590D. Therefore the Lenovo and Asus will be about ~$100 more and thus will be priced at $799 MSRP or simply ~$800 USD,....or so I have heard,....

The only 4K PC monitor that should be cheaper then the Samsung that I can think of (besides the Seiki 39" UHDTV) would be the Dell P2815Q but that's a 30Hz only model. I say this because Dell really shouldn't be selling that model at the same price as the Samsung so a price drop should be a forced issue at this point.

http://www.tomshardware.com/news/lenovo-4k-monitor,25566.html

http://www.engadget.com/2014/01/06/asus-28-inch-4k-display/
 
it needs to be 120hz and hardware needs to be able to get close to pushing that for me to consider 4k
 
Can't afford it right now, not only would I have to invest in a monitor, but also an SLI setup as well to run it. Maybe when it gets cheaper I'll dive in
 
I don't see the point in buying a 4k monitor now since they will have G-sync/freesync support next year.
 
Wildace said:
it needs to be 120hz and hardware needs to be able to get close to pushing that for me to consider 4k
Click to expand...

I thought about that a bunch and I think that we would need more than 4 current generation video cards to hit 120Hz unless you start cutting off the eye candy. Talking about demanding games like BF4, Project Cars, etc. Now supposedly 4k monitors looks as nice as any 1080p monitor in 1080p mode @120Hz. I haven't confirmed it myself; just reading what others were saying about them. If that is true then you can have the best of both worlds.

With that said I'd wait for Displayport 1.3 monitors to start showing up with FreeSync baked into the standard.
 
D4rkn3ss said:
jeebus, the voice of that little shit, friggin thing is unwatchable, bleegh. anyway, 4K in the form of a 28" TN?? i'll stick with my 27EA83 thank you very much.
Click to expand...

Real mature. Another to the list.
 
DPI said:
That's exactly the monitor I was going to buy next.

And not only does the price-performance ratio on 4K monitors have to come down, but we need the next generation of GPU to drive them without having to resort to multiple cards. I'd want at least a GTX 880 before I'd consider a 4K screen.
Click to expand...

Be prepared to run on low graphics settings with only 1 card. My 3 - 24"s are a bit shy of 4k resolution (3600x1920), and I run a mixture of medium and high settings with 2x780s. I pull down 50-60 fps depending on the game. I plan on getting a third card for my setup here soon which will hopefully be able to push games better, get a constant 60 fps, etc.
 
I'll be waiting until we have 4k displays at 75+Hz and the hardware to drive them. I am sure standing still 4k looks incredible, but in motion a 60Hz display is a blurry mess no matter how many pixels it has.

I am hoping for a 4k 120Hz monitor and proper hardware to run it by 2019.
 
NukeDukem said:
I'll be waiting until we have 4k displays at 75+Hz and the hardware to drive them. I am sure standing still 4k looks incredible, but 60Hz displays are a blurry mess no matter how many pixels they have.

I am hoping for a 4k 120Hz monitor and proper hardware to run it by 2019.
Click to expand...
I'm with you on this one. I don't think I could ever go back to gaming at 60 Hz on the PC. I don't think it will take that long, though. Maybe around 3 years.

Until such time I really would like to grab the ASUS PG278Q... whenever they finally decide to release it :mad:.
 
I don't get why people are saying we don't have the hardware to drive 4k monitors today without multiple cards which is untrue. Barring the occasional game like Crysis 3 or something it's actually quite doable with a single high end card today.
 
Kind of funny how this popped up on Kotaku just today I guess.....

http://kotaku.com/i-built-a-4k-ultra-hd-gaming-pc-and-i-love-it-1564135136

Are We There Yet, Ultra HD Gaming?

Not without a whole hell of a lot of money we're not. With at least a pair of higher end graphic cards required to get frame rates into the 60s for recent graphics-intensive titles and the cost of securing a halfway-decent monitor still in the multiple thousands, outside of enthusiasts with money to burn and members of the gaming press borrowing a whole mess of hardware from the likes of AMD, Ultra HD is beyond the means of most consumers.
Click to expand...
 
I've seriously contemplated jumping to 4k myself but quite honestly I don't want to give up the surround setup just yet. You can do surround at 4k resolutions but honestly that's a pretty big cost increase to do so. Not so much for the monitors but I'd have to go with 3 Titan Black's at a minimum for the extra VRAM and I'd probably contemplate a CPU upgrade as well. Even though the results of such a setup were better than I anticipated going by the thread on the subject in the video card forum the performance is still a bit lower than I'd like to see.

If I go 4K then I'd probably just replace my center display and use the other monitors for work space alone rather than gaming. But this is something I don't know if I'm willing to do right now.

And like many others I'm waiting on G-Sync capable 4k displays. Though I prefer IPS panels and it will be awhile or maybe never that I can have an IPS display that's capable of more than 60Hz at 4k.
 
Personally I want something larger. 32"-35" is what I'm waiting for. Some are in the works supposedly. I agree some maturing of the product needs to be done too. Overall quality is just not here yet as far as gaming goes.
 
Skott said:
Personally I want something larger. 32"-35" is what I'm waiting for. Some are in the works supposedly. I agree some maturing of the product needs to be done too. Overall quality is just not here yet as far as gaming goes.
Click to expand...

yep, my guess is i (we) have to wait something like two year for this tech to mature. the reason that im *very* interested in a 32" 4k display is that i find 27" too small and i cant deal with bezels. i also dont like 21:9 screens.
 
mi7chy said:
I'll jump in when single card GPU can drive 4K resolution at near 60 fps with support for HDMI 2.0 and DP 1.3 at 60Hz and OLED 4K 60Hz panels are available but am willing to compromise for equivalent LCD.

On a side note, wasn't impressed with first generation OLED TV I saw the other day at Fry's. It lacked the WOW factor along with skin tone appearing too pinkish.
Click to expand...

Single cards will never be able to drive 4k for new games. Developers have a target they aim for and its usually 1080p or slightly higher. They take the top of the line card and scale performance to that. 4k will never be the target, it is the land of dual or triple cards and will always be that way.
 
D4rkn3ss said:
jeebus, the voice of that little shit, friggin thing is unwatchable, bleegh. anyway, 4K in the form of a 28" TN?? i'll stick with my 27EA83 thank you very much.
Click to expand...

lol I couldn't watch it either. At least without taking a shot of morphine 1st to dull the grating.
 
Regarding single GPUs the move to stacked memory will provide significant memory bandwidth gains and likely free up die space to increase ROP performance as well.
 
DPI said:
I'm far more interested in GSync than 4K. Its going to be a while before 4K monitors are feasible for gaming, meaning that they become a little more widespread to the point they start making some with gaming in mind. The input latency on the current offerings is less than good.
Click to expand...

Same here I'm waiting on a 27" 4K GSync monitor. Best value for my money right there.
 
I am still not doing 4k gaming even if I have a dell 30 incher. I do run games such as World of Tanks at full res though.
 
I would adopt 4k if I thought it was really ready for prime time. I read the latest MaximumPC review of the Dell UP2414Q 4k monitor. They say the thing looks awesome but a single GTX 780ti could just cope with moderately demanding games maxed out. And this is on a 24 inch display. Then he mentioned the DPI settings in windows not being 4k friendly and 3rd party apps look awful and so do web pages. His general take was much of the computing world isn't ready for high DPI displays.

But I haven't seen one myself, just passing on what I read by someone who used a 4k display and tested it out.
 
Poordevil said:
I would adopt 4k if I thought it was really ready for prime time. I read the latest MaximumPC review of the Dell UP2414Q 4k monitor. They say the thing looks awesome but a single GTX 780ti could just cope with moderately demanding games maxed out. And this is on a 24 inch display. Then he mentioned the DPI settings in windows not being 4k friendly and 3rd party apps look awful and so do web pages. His general take was much of the computing world isn't ready for high DPI displays.

But I haven't seen one myself, just passing on what I read by someone who used a 4k display and tested it out.
Click to expand...

He is full of shit. A 780 TI isn't going to push a graphics intensive game, such as BF4 at 4k resolution very well on highest settings.

2560x1440 = 3,686,400 pixels
3840x2160 = 8,294,400 pixels

The below from [H] just barely pushes BF4 maxed out at under half the pixels of a 4k monitor past 60fps. Go with god or go SLI.

1390791299tEF82ufriR_4_1.png
 
DraginDime said:
This has been my thoughts also.
I'm just getting tired of waiting on Asus to release the ROG SWIFT PG278Q (27" 1440p/144hz/g-sync). I almost said screw it and bought one of those Samsung 4k screens, but there were none in stock for Amazon Prime or I'd probably have pulled the trigger.

I would hold off on 4K gaming for a while longer, as more monitors come out and the technology matures, things will get better and hopefully prices come down some more.
Click to expand...

im with you on the rog swift.
im currently running surround but am planning on going back to a simpler build for my next build.
a single card solution that can push the rog swift.
will most likely buy the monitor first since my current pc is more than capable of pushing it, until it is time for a new pc.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top