Three screens or 1 4K

[TheFaze97]

Hey again all

 

I was first going to buy 3 of this Dell UltraSharp U2414H to put in a NVidia surround setup which costs about 980 Dollars where i live

 

But then i saw This 4K Samsung LU28D590D which costs 770 dollars

 

And now i am wondering what to buy.

 

 

I am mostly going to be playing games on the monitors. and wondering what FPS i can expect from the 4K and the 3 1080p monitors

 

I have got a GTX 680 4Gb and i know i can’t get like 60FPS at BF4 at ultra

 

Or any better Advices for what to buy

 

The monitor i have now is a Asus VG278 and i am planing of having that on top of ether the 3 monitors or the 4K to play 120Hz games if i want.

Thanks for the help

[Ivyk]

If you can't get 60 FPS there is no use in getting a 120Hz monitor.

 

But to help you choose: If you mainly game I would go for the 4K monitor. I don't like have to turn my neck to see what is going on when I play video games.

[Coombzy]

get a new gpu for 4K or SLI for triple screen one 680 will do ok with surround but not that great also 4K does not have the ability to go to 120Hz yet.

[Jaybird]

Id go with 3 1080P because its 3. IMO

[shouldervalley]

3 screens if you want to play games NOW 4k if you want it to be amazing in 2-3 years when gpu tech catches up

[needmorewood]

4k samsung with a side 1080p screen !

[FloRolf]

why not buy 2 more VG278s?

[Ryan Leech]

I would go for 5760x1080

[Brazsty]

I would go 4k.

[TheFaze97]

If you can't get 60 FPS there is no use in getting a 120Hz monitor.

 

But to help you choose: If you mainly game I would go for the 4K monitor. I don't like have to turn my neck to see what is going on when I play video games.

I can get like 80-90 FPS on Battlefield now at High but dips sometimes down to 70

Hmm yes true

 

get a new gpu for 4K or SLI for triple screen one 680 will do ok with surround but not that great also 4K does not have the ability to go to 120Hz yet.

A new GPU is not an option right now cause i dont got the money for another/New one now, But when the New Nvidia gpus coms out i am buing a new one, And yes i know that 4K dont support 120Hz Yet, I dont think that it is any cabel that support 120Hz 4K yet

 

I would go for 5760x1080

Hmm, Yes think i will go for 5760x1080

 

4k samsung with a side 1080p screen !

Hmm, But the samsung is TN so it is not as good as an IPS panel soo i think i will go for 3 of the dells

 

why not buy 2 more VG278s?

Cause they costs 670 Dollar for 1 monitor

[hawaiims]

Hmm, But the samsung is TN so it is not as good as an IPS panel soo i think i will go for 3 of the dells

 

Cause they costs 670 Dollar for 1 monitor

Wait a year for 60hz 4k IPS to be in the 600 to 700 dollar range. Then it's gonna be real hard to pass out. 

[JAKEBAB]

the 4k montior is tn and the other 3 are only 1080p honestly id wait save up more than by the time 4k ips monitors are more mainstream u might be able to get 2 or 3.

[GoodBytes]

I would go with 4K if you get the Dell 24inch 4K: UP2414Q

I would not go with a TN panel, especially not that the Samsung one is stuck at 30Hz in 4K.

The cool thing with 4K is that if you don't have the GPU power, nothing stops you from running your games in 1080p, as 4K is 4x 1080p theoretically speaking, so you should see no blur.

[Real_PhillBert]

I'm not an expert on the 680, but wont that have some troubles with both 5760x1080 and 3840x2160?

 

If you are only getting 60FPS at 1080, you will not enjoy your experience at 3840x2160, at least not on the same quality settings. 

[BrightCandle]

I bought 2 x 680s for 3 way 1920x1200 gaming. 2 cards of this performance is about the minimum I would recommend for these sorts of resolutions, one card just lacks enough performance to do it well. You can obviously turn down to medium and low settings to make it work, but especially with 3 screens that ends up being a poor trade off since you spend all your time looking at the centre screen as the 2 side screens are peripheral view only. I went off of 3x screens however as less and less games were working well with it.

 

The main comparison between 4k and 3x screens is the massive difference these bring. 3 screens is about peripheral vision, it will only work with some games and the secondary screens will have a stretched and distorted image on them. 4k on the other hand is a the usual 16:9 ratio, so it will work with pretty much all games.  Performance will be similar although about 25% worse on the 4k screen. 4k is mostly about fidelity, it puts 4x as many pixels in the same areas previously there was 1 pixel. So it reduces the desire for antialiasing as the pixels are much smaller. Its not sufficient to eliminate the need for anti aliasing but many people talking about 2x MSAA looking every bit as good as 4x MSAA did on low density screens. 4k will have problems in windows as well, Windows scaling is kind of rubbish and inconsistent so for some apps you'll need to switch back to 1080p. Some of the browsers don't support high resolution images and text any most applications don't either. 3 screens on the other hand will work in Windows but with some trade offs, specifically in around maximising windows and where dialogs appear.

 

All in all I don't think either experience is very good right now.

[StareX]

4K.. You'll never go back.

[Hakka]

 

There's no going back from this. I'll go 4k when I have enough GPU grunt to run 3 of them at ultra.

[TheFaze97]

the 4k montior is tn and the other 3 are only 1080p honestly id wait save up more than by the time 4k ips monitors are more mainstream u might be able to get 2 or 3.

 

 

Hmm yes true, but i want new screens/screen Now

 

 

I would go with 4K if you get the Dell 24inch 4K: UP2414Q

I would not go with a TN panel, especially not that the Samsung one is stuck at 30Hz in 4K.

The cool thing with 4K is that if you don't have the GPU power, nothing stops you from running your games in 1080p, as 4K is 4x 1080p theoretically speaking, so you should see no blur.

 

 

Nah i do not want a 24" 4K monitor i think that would be to small as i got a 27" now. And the Samsung one is stuck at 30Hz with HDMI but with Displayport u can get 60Hz 4K

Yes true but then what is the point of buing a 4K monitor if you ar going to use 4K

 

 

I'm not an expert on the 680, but wont that have some troubles with both 5760x1080 and 3840x2160?

 

If you are only getting 60FPS at 1080, you will not enjoy your experience at 3840x2160, at least not on the same quality settings. 

 

 

Well i am getting 80-90FPS at 1080p High in BF4 soo i would expect ca 40 FPS at medium/low at 4K

I am also playing some MMO soo it would be helpfull with 4K, Much more space putting things

 

 

I bought 2 x 680s for 3 way 1920x1200 gaming. 2 cards of this performance is about the minimum I would recommend for these sorts of resolutions, one card just lacks enough performance to do it well. You can obviously turn down to medium and low settings to make it work, but especially with 3 screens that ends up being a poor trade off since you spend all your time looking at the centre screen as the 2 side screens are peripheral view only. I went off of 3x screens however as less and less games were working well with it.

 

The main comparison between 4k and 3x screens is the massive difference these bring. 3 screens is about peripheral vision, it will only work with some games and the secondary screens will have a stretched and distorted image on them. 4k on the other hand is a the usual 16:9 ratio, so it will work with pretty much all games.  Performance will be similar although about 25% worse on the 4k screen. 4k is mostly about fidelity, it puts 4x as many pixels in the same areas previously there was 1 pixel. So it reduces the desire for antialiasing as the pixels are much smaller. Its not sufficient to eliminate the need for anti aliasing but many people talking about 2x MSAA looking every bit as good as 4x MSAA did on low density screens. 4k will have problems in windows as well, Windows scaling is kind of rubbish and inconsistent so for some apps you'll need to switch back to 1080p. Some of the browsers don't support high resolution images and text any most applications don't either. 3 screens on the other hand will work in Windows but with some trade offs, specifically in around maximising windows and where dialogs appear.

 

All in all I don't think either experience is very good right now.

 

 

Yeah, The triple screens i guess is sortoff a gimmick thing

 

Well since i read that, i have changed my mind, I tryed now BT4 with my monitor + 2 19" horizontal monitors and i did really not look at the sides that much. I am now going with 4K I think ;D

And i guess i will buy a new GPU and sell the the one i have now, but that is later when Nvidia relases the Gtx 8** series. 

 

 

4K.. You'll never go back.

 

 

True, i think i am changing my mind, since 4K is the furture and is going to be insane good picture quality. and i saw a 80" 4K TV when i was in London, and Just WOW think of the clarity when it is a 28"

 

 

_D8F8924.jpg

 

There's no going back from this. I'll go 4k when I have enough GPU grunt to run 3 of them at ultra.

 

 

Yes that is cool Here is another post with the 3 Dells that i was thinking of getting And just look at the slim bezels http://www.dayonepatch.com/index.php?/topic/99828-new-monitor-setup-for-new-year-surround-setup/

 

 

 

 

 

 

Thanks for the help Guys has helped a lot ;D

What a great forum

 

sorry for my bad English (from norway )

[TheFaze97]

_D8F8924.jpg

 

There's no going back from this. I'll go 4k when I have enough GPU grunt to run 3 of them at ultra.

 

 

And btw Hakka, what monitor stand is that ? Looks Great

[GoodBytes]

Nah i do not want a 24" 4K monitor i think that would be to small as i got a 27" now.

That depends on you.

If you have good eyes, where you can see small with or without glasses, then it will be fine. If you want to know how it will look like, to get an idea, checkout the Surface Pro 2 at the store. Set the DPI to 100%, log-off and back on, and you'll see how 4K will look like. (will be a bit bigger, if I didn't screw up my math).

You can also use it at 150% or 200% DPI and enjoy, on supported high DPI friendly programs (all Microsoft software and Firefox for now, pretty much)

And that means smoother text, smoother and nicer looking icons.

And the Samsung one is stuck at 30Hz with HDMI but with Displayport u can get 60Hz 4K

Very good

 

 

Yes true but then what is the point of buing a 4K monitor if you ar going to use 4K

Increase work space?!?

[JAKEBAB]

 

 

There's no going back from this. I'll go 4k when I have enough GPU grunt to run 3 of them at ultra.

what is the small screen in the middle? and whats it doing? also thats a real nice setup.

 

Edit: lol we have the same piece of crap router do u live in Australia?

[gmgq23]

True, i think i am changing my mind, since 4K is the furture and is going to be insane good picture quality. and i saw a 80" 4K TV when i was in London, and Just WOW think of the clarity when it is a 28"

 

Really?  I think the OPPOSITE is true.  Higher resolution on a Huge screen is more impressive than higher resolution on a Small screen. 

 

Just look at all the latest phones and tablets (i.e. Retina display).  At some point your eyes can't physically see the difference the higher resolution is displaying. 

 

Going back to your original question, I would go with triple monitors at this point.  Sure 4k may be the future, but that's the key word -- "future."  Being an early adopter = cost you more money (4k today vs 4k later) + not much content to take advantage of it.

There's barely any 4k content right now, so you won't be able to take advantage of it.  By the time 4k content is more readily available, there will be more 4k displays available and they will be cheaper.  So upgrade then. 

 

Whereas you can totally take advantage of a triple monitor setup TODAY.  Plus it's more desktop real estate to play with, compared to one 4k display is just... one.  I'm running 3x24" + 1x21" on top (same layout as Hakka).  So I can have 4 full screen windows open at once, awesome for multitasking without having to swap windows.

 

I love how thin the Dell bezel is.

 

My 2 cents.

 

[BrightCandle]

Of the options for high end gaming monitor setups you basically have today:

1) Gsync in the Asus 24" screen with a module

2) Lightboost 2 based monitors with strobe and 144hz.

3) 3x screens for peripheral vision

4) 4k screens

5) 1440p and potentially overclocked Korean monitor

6) Occulus rift dev kit VR glasses

 

Of the options I think 1 and 2 are more compelling than 3 and 4. I had (3) for quite a while and I barely used the 3 monitors. A lot of games just didn't support it, those that did ran kind of poorly and needed settings turned down often. I hit a lot of bottlenecks with 3 screens and 4k is going to be even worse for that.

 

4k is one of those technologies that depending on the scaling algorithm might be decent. If you can get a monitor that has a good simple scalar (1 pixel to 4 without interpolation) then you can get a 1080p resolution on the screen and still have it be relatively sharp. So far I have heard it doesn't work like that, the scalars are adding a lot of latency at 1080p and interpolating the pixels making the images fuzzy. But in theory at least this is one of the major benefits of 4k screens. 

 

A 1440p 27" monitor is a decent step towards 4k resolutions with less cost and more options. It doesn't obviously have as high a density of pixels as 4k but todays GPUs can handle it better. We have so many good options on the high end for different experiences, but a lot of them are still a bit buggy.

[Hakka]

And btw Hakka, what monitor stand is that ? Looks Great

Highgrade ts746a.

[Hakka]

what is the small screen in the middle? and whats it doing? also thats a real nice setup.

Edit: lol we have the same piece of crap router do u live in Australia?

Its an ipad air, it runs the battlescreen app with the minimap, its not showing anything in the pic because the server is empty.

Yep, bendigo vic.