Why is Linus mentioning 4K?

[filipcro]

I find it really annoying that Linus keeps mentioning 4K, thus confusing people with a useless irrelevant thing.

 

A couple of facts:

 

1.No game supports this resolution

2.Nobody seriously thinks any game will support this resolution in at least 5 years

3.You can barely have 60 fps at 1920*1200 with highest settings on most games even if you have the most expensive GPU you could possibly buy

4.The necessary leap would make GPUs monstruously expensive by default and would drastically shorten the cycle of upgrading GPUs, making the whole think completly unviable

[FireFox]

I find it really annoying that Linus keeps mentioning 4K, thus confusing people with a useless irrelevant thing.

 

A couple of facts:

 

1.No game supports this resolution

2.Nobody seriously thinks any game will support this resolution in at least 5 years

3.You can barely have 60 fps at 1920*1200 with highest settings on most games even if you have the most expensive GPU you could possibly buy

4.The necessary leap would make GPUs monstruously expensive by default and would drastically shorten the cycle of upgrading GPUs, making the whole think completly unviable

 

Well it's a new technology so why shouldn't he mention it?

 

GPU's are getting more powerful so give it time :) would be interesting to see 3 4k displays and gaming on them

[FloRolf]

maybe, because 4k is pretty awesome? o.O and i think with the new consoles we see much better support for 4k.

[filipcro]

maybe, because 4k is pretty awesome? o.O and i think with the new consoles we see much better support for 4k.

 

 

For what? Playing games at 10fps?

[deafboy]

Single GPUs are going to be there quick, and many people are already playing at beyond 4k resolution.  (Surround/eyefinity with 1440/1600p) with multiple GPUs

 

If I could buy a 32" 4k panel, I would....

[Keen_Interest]

I find it really annoying that Linus keeps mentioning 4K, thus confusing people with a useless irrelevant thing.

 

A couple of facts:

 

1.No game supports this resolution

2.Nobody seriously thinks any game will support this resolution in at least 5 years

3.You can barely have 60 fps at 1920*1200 with highest settings on most games even if you have the most expensive GPU you could possibly buy

4.The necessary leap would make GPUs monstruously expensive by default and would drastically shorten the cycle of upgrading GPUs, making the whole think completly unviable

Its a tech channel, 4k monitors are forefront technology. Doesn't take a genius to work out why he talks about them...

[Nayjames123]

I find it really annoying that Linus keeps mentioning 4K, thus confusing people with a useless irrelevant thing.

 

A couple of facts:

 

1.No game supports this resolution

2.Nobody seriously thinks any game will support this resolution in at least 5 years

3.You can barely have 60 fps at 1920*1200 with highest settings on most games even if you have the most expensive GPU you could possibly buy

4.The necessary leap would make GPUs monstruously expensive by default and would drastically shorten the cycle of upgrading GPUs, making the whole think completly unviable

games do support 5760*1080, which can be thought of as 3k, Im sure with the graphics hardware games will support 4K very soon

[Andi]

4k is awesome and you can do way more with a pc than play games? I think it will take 2-3 years and 4k will be as good to use as 1440/1600p

[LinusTech]

I find it really annoying that Linus keeps mentioning 4K, thus confusing people with a useless irrelevant thing.

A couple of facts:

1.No game supports this resolution

2.Nobody seriously thinks any game will support this resolution in at least 5 years

3.You can barely have 60 fps at 1920*1200 with highest settings on most games even if you have the most expensive GPU you could possibly buy

4.The necessary leap would make GPUs monstruously expensive by default and would drastically shorten the cycle of upgrading GPUs, making the whole think completly unviable

You'll need to do a little more research about this topic I think.

4k is supported by pretty much any PC game and modern graphics cards can handle many of them.

Another cool thing is that because it's exactly 4x 1080p you can run 1080p without interpolation.

Not to mention the productivity advantages of higher resolution displays.

[KaareKanin]

Lots of game engines can be set to "any" resolution you want. With a good dual gpu setup you should be able to do OK, remember, AA shouldn't be necessary at 4k

Edit: Ninja'd by Linus!

[Andi]

Interpolation ?

If you don't run native resolution or a variant of it like 1/4 you lose a lot of imagequality. just set your display to 1600x900(if you have a 1080p display) and your monitor needs to interpolate a new pixel between 2 pixels. Text will lose focus, everthing looks squishy.

 

just play around with your resolution and you can see for yourself

[samkitt]

How about some 4K Benchmarks?

[KaareKanin]

Interpolation ?

In discrete mathematics, you only have information at about specific points. Say you measure something, like the temperature inside an oven. You take one measurement at every minute and note it down. So you know what temp the oven had at 3 minutes and at 4 minutes, but if you want to know the temperature at 3 minutes and 30 seconds, you don't have any data points to help you out. What you do then is that you guess in what manner the temperature changes over time and use the data you have to make a guess about what temperature you had at 3:30. Normally one would just use linear interpolation, so at any mid point you would just take the average of the two closest known values.

Anyways, since the image signal only contains information about certain points, if the resolution provided by the HW doesn't match up with the native display resolution, what happens is that the display will want to display pixels that it doesn't really have any data on, so it'll have to guess what should be there, much like the oven example ;)

[Dudenstein]

When thinking of 4k gaming is the least of my concern. It'll be great for photo editing and would be king for productivity. When a 27 inch 4k monitor comes to play I will be jumping on it quick and use my two 23 inch 1080p panels as side panels for additional screen space for sub tasks. Gaming on 4k isn't that important to me.

[Andi]

intresting what about 1920x1200 ?

it's the same problem. 960x600 would look good. everthing in between not :D

[Glenwing]

intresting what about 1920x1200 ?

What about it?  You can't run it on a 1080p monitor.  If you have a 1920x1200 monitor and you set it to a 16:9 resolution you can have it either put black bars and act like a 1080p monitor, or have it stretch and then things will look really different from native resolution.

[pcman2000]

Interpolation ?

 

Here's something I quickly drew in SNote.

 

 

As you can see, a 2x2 image cannot be scaled pixel perfect to a 3x3 image. It will require interpolation

 

However, it can scale fine to 4x4 by using 4 pixels as one pixel.

[mgsstar]

How about some 4K Benchmarks?

Here is a 4K benchmark from PCPerspective: http://www.pcper.com/reviews/Graphics-Cards/Frame-Rating-High-End-GPUs-Benchmarked-4K-Resolutions

[Muffinator]

http://www.pcworld.com/article/2040410/asus-crams-4k-resolution-into-a-31-5-inch-ultra-hd-monitor.html

 ^ That ^

[Art Vandelay]

I find it really annoying that Linus keeps mentioning 4K, thus confusing people with a useless irrelevant thing.

 

A couple of facts:

 

1.No game supports this resolution

2.Nobody seriously thinks any game will support this resolution in at least 5 years

3.You can barely have 60 fps at 1920*1200 with highest settings on most games even if you have the most expensive GPU you could possibly buy

4.The necessary leap would make GPUs monstruously expensive by default and would drastically shorten the cycle of upgrading GPUs, making the whole think completly unviable

1. no, most game engines can have custom resolutions

 

2. no

 

3. with titan SLI, you can do pretty well on a 120hz monitor on crysis 3.

 

4. that makes no sense.

[prodigydoo]

3.You can barely have 60 fps at 1920*1200 with highest settings on most games even if you have the most expensive GPU you could possibly buy

 

I have a gtx 580. I can play at 60fps on max settings on basically every game i own...

[P1X3]

Because I would rather buy 1 30" 4k monitor rather than having 2x2 22/24" monitors for the office.

[jbr]

I find it really annoying that Linus keeps mentioning 4K, thus confusing people with a useless irrelevant thing.

 

A couple of facts:

 

1.No game supports this resolution

2.Nobody seriously thinks any game will support this resolution in at least 5 years

3.You can barely have 60 fps at 1920*1200 with highest settings on most games even if you have the most expensive GPU you could possibly buy

4.The necessary leap would make GPUs monstruously expensive by default and would drastically shorten the cycle of upgrading GPUs, making the whole think completly unviable

 

1: Wrong

2: Wrong again

3: Wrong

4: Expensive but hardly "Monsterous".

[Xelithium]

I thought Linus had a tech channel and not a gaming channel.

 

You seriously have to understand the productivity increase that 4K will bring.

[Blade of Grass]

You also have to realise that they aren't just for gaming. I don't know where you get the idea that a 4k monitor would only be used for gaming.

 

Consider this, gaming is probably one of the smallest percentage of use for computers, it's dominated by business oriented stuff (word processing, data entry, programming), web browsing, movie watching, and probably even school work.

 

The reason why he might be mentioning it (other than the fact that it's a tech channel and this is technology) is probably because he does other things (like 98% of the world) other than gaming on his computer. Remember, this isn't a gaming channel, it's about technology. Same reason why at CES he was looking at TVs and other non-gaming related stuff.