Future of 4K gaming

[Dragon_Cannon]

The future of 4K gaming is bright. A recent article over on pc per http://www.pcper.com/reviews/Graphics-Cards/Frame-Rating-High-End-GPUs-Benchmarked-4K-Resolutions has had Ryan looking at the feasibility of 4K gaming.

 

In the article he goes over things such as how the current generation of cards stack for 4K on both the red and the green team. It shows that the current generation of cards are capable of not only being able to push 4K resolution but also doing so at some very playable frame rates.

 

The Titan stacks up well for 4K gaming as is to be expected with the 6GB frame buffer and the GK110 chip. But what is even more surprising is that the 2GB GTX 680 has borderline playable frame rates with a noticeable improvement when the 4GB version is used. The 7970 is still the clear front runner when it comes to 4K gaming for single GPU under $1000 averaging 2-3 fps in almost all situations which when you end up down at around the 20 fps mark could make all the difference. 

 

There are graphs in this article that show just how well of a job AMD has done currently of tackling the frame time issue that exists with Crossfire configurations. http://www.pcper.com/image/view/23662?return=node%2F57125. The article says that the driver wont be ready until June/July but with the current progress that AMD have made I have no doubt that they will have made I have no doubt that it will be much better when they release it to the public. Will it be as good as the what nvidia has to do with frame times? No because they have hardware on the cards to help to smooth it out but will it be close. I would bet on it. 

 

All in all the future of 4K gaming looks bright, maybe not in the next generation of graphics cards but most likely in the one after we will have 60 or even greater FPS. The only place that the performance can go is up from here. With the price of 4K televisions and monitors ever decreasing in price, it make 4K not a niche gaming platform but almost at certain gaming platform. 

 

 

[rossi94]

Often the tests are with AA, what's totally unnecessary in these high resultions.

[prodigydoo]

I cant wait until 4k Gaming becomes a proper reality :P

[Dragon_Cannon]

Often the tests are with AA, what's totally unnecessary in these high resultions.

That is a good point, if it were disabled I reckon that there would be enough of a performance increase on the 2GB 680 to actually push it to above 25 fps which would make it that much more playable rather than down at 20 which is where is sits with aa enable in both Crysis 3 and Battlefield 3. In Farcry the framerates are at a level that I would consider to not even be playable on any of the single GPU cards, disabling the AA would certainly help with that

[rossi94]

They leave it on to tell you - YOU NEED A TITAN FOR 4K .. give us 1000 bucks.

[Dragon_Cannon]

They leave it on to tell you - YOU NEED A TITAN FOR 4K .. give us 1000 bucks.

 

These test were run at 1920x1200 though. As apposed to 4K.

[rossi94]

Proof?

[Dragon_Cannon]

Proof?

 

http://www.pcper.com/files/fixed/bf3settings.jpg

http://www.pcper.com/reviews/Graphics-Cards/Frame-Rating-High-End-GPUs-Benchmarked-4K-Resolutions/Battlefield-3-Single-GP

[nath10597]

When 4K becomes well used TV will be 2 generations behind.

[heineygoat]

The biggest issue with 4k tv is that one single HDMI cable can only push that resolution at 30Hz, which is fine for tv, but most of us are used to pc gaming at 60 and 120Hz and we arent going to see speeds like that on a 4k monitor until someone can introduce a new standard plug.

[Dragon_Cannon]

The biggest issue with 4k tv is that one single HDMI cable can only push that resolution at 30Hz, which is fine for tv, but most of us are used to pc gaming at 60 and 120Hz and we arent going to see speeds like that on a 4k monitor until someone can introduce a new standard plug.

 

Someone does not need to introduce a new standard, DisplayPort is capable of driving a 4K res at 60Hz. The reason that Ryan did not use this in his testing is because the 4K TV that he was using on has HDMI inputs. I would also wager that the next revision of HDMI will also support 4K at 60Hz

[heineygoat]

Someone does not need to introduce a new standard, DisplayPort is capable of driving a 4K res at 60Hz. The reason that Ryan did not use this in his testing is because the 4K TV that he was using on has HDMI inputs. I would also wager that the next revision of HDMI will also support 4K at 60Hz

Well then lets go 4k!

[Dragon_Cannon]

Well then lets go 4k!

 

Problem with that is the only things that have DisplayPort on them and can drive 4K res are upwards of $4000 closer to $5000, the cheapest being that 4K sharp monitor that Linus said he might get. http://sharp-world.com/products/professional-monitors/products/pn-k321/specifications.html

[Benbass]

Often the tests are with AA, what's totally unnecessary in these high resultions.

 

Ryan said in a podcast or the video review that he was seeing the difference with and without AA and that's why he did the benchmark with AA.

 

 

http://www.pcper.com/files/fixed/bf3settings.jpg

http://www.pcper.com/reviews/Graphics-Cards/Frame-Rating-High-End-GPUs-Benchmarked-4K-Resolutions/Battlefield-3-Single-GP

 

All test where in 4K. Don't you think a Titan would get a higher than 30/40fps in 1920x1200 ? :p

 

This is a screenshot from one of their short 4K videos on youtube. 

[rossi94]

I think he is testing @ > 40" you won't play on such a big screen usually. So the pixeldensity will be much higher. It's about future of 4K gaming :P

[Lukiose]

Furthermore, with Nvidia's 800 series, the maxwell architecture carrying unified virtual memory with system ram, supporting high res like 4K seems to not be a far off reality! We just need the horsepower to drive it, and monitors to become available

[Nicktrance]

Someone does not need to introduce a new standard, DisplayPort is capable of driving a 4K res at 60Hz. The reason that Ryan did not use this in his testing is because the 4K TV that he was using on has HDMI inputs. I would also wager that the next revision of HDMI will also support 4K at 60Hz

Yes, they are working on a new HDMI spec, which should be available next year (according to Ryan Shrout) the problem is that it won't make a difference for people who already own a 4K TV based on the current spec.

 

I think he is testing @ > 40" you won't play on such a big screen usually. So the pixeldensity will be much higher. It's about future of 4K gaming :P

My thoughts exactly. if it were a 30" 4K TV it would have 140 PPI as opposed to the current average PPI of about 90-110 PPI. The problem there would be windows optimization, everything will look much smaller than they would even on a 2560*1600/1440 27" screen.

To anyone actually believing consoles will be more powerful than PCs, we're starting to move to 4K while they have only just moved to having most games running at FullHD :D.

[TechFan@ic]

What's the point though of playing on 4K ? it's very hard to justify , especially since most games are designed for 720p (the consoles are to blame for this) & that's why the textures on most games look atrocious on 1920x1080 & it gets even worse on 2560x1440.
With the new consoles, the majority of games will be designed for 1080p though so that should improve the situation just slightly, but it's still way too soon for gaming on 4K, we need the content for it to come out first.
 

 

 The 7970 is still the clear front runner when it comes to 4K gaming for single GPU under $1000 averaging 2-3 fps in almost all situations which when you end up down at around the 20 fps mark could make all the difference. 

I think you mean averaging 2-3 FPS better than the 680 in almost all situations, not averaging 2-3 FPS because that is "for lack of a better term" a slide show.

[rossi94]

To come away from using AA and other "tricks" to get a clearer image.

[TechFan@ic]

To come away from using AA and other "tricks" to get a clearer image.

You'd still want AA on 4K. That's why PCPer.com enabled it in their benchmarks.

[tabuburn]

I sit about 1 1/2 feet from my 1440p monitor and I can still see a difference between AA and non-AA. I see AA being around until we approach 200ppi.

[rossi94]

Okay .. imagine 4K is standard. a 24" or 27" 4k screen would be the one you're using for gaming. So you really think you need AA then?

[MzCatieB]

i expect 2 maybe 3 more generations before graphics cards can handle 4k res's. then again im sure most people wont want to spend £1k+ on a monitor (saying that im saving for a £3.5k monitor)

[tabuburn]

Okay .. imagine 4K is standard. a 24" or 27" 4k screen would be the one you're using for gaming. So you really think you need AA then?

If the PPI is high enough to negate the "jaggies", then AA would start being unnecessary unless maybe for bragging rights to say that your rig can handle 4K res max settings with AA.

[Dragon_Cannon]

i expect 2 maybe 3 more generations before graphics cards can handle 4k res's. then again im sure most people wont want to spend £1k+ on a monitor (saying that im saving for a £3.5k monitor)

 

Most of the people on this forum fit into that category. People that want the best gaming and viewing experience are gonna be the people that will spend the money.