Support NeoGAF

[lostinblue]

For work it sure is. 1440p means bigger work environment, 4K just means prettier lettering.

 

[StateofMajora]

240fps is just too much on a hardware level all around. We don't have good enough processing to reach it on average, nor good enough displays. That lcd is not fast enough to avoid inverse ghosting ; we need self emissive 240hz panels for that.

If you're playing on that monitor you're most likely using vrr, which means you aren't using black frame insertion which, if it's a proper implementation is heavenly.

A proper locked 120fps with black frame insertion is simply mesmerizing... And of course you will keep much higher pixel count/settings targeting 120 vs 240. The first game I tried at 120fps was metro 2033 on PC with its per object blur and everything and holy shit I just couldn't ask for more smoothness than what I saw that day.

 

[BusierDonkey]

60fps is my basement figure now. I'll shut AA off completely and run in potato mode before I'd go below that. 120fps should be the target. 30 should have gone away after the first gen of 3D consoles.

 

[Mister Wolf]

60fps is my basement figure now. I'll shut AA off completely and run in potato mode before I'd go below that. 120fps should be the target. 30 should have gone away after the first gen of 3D consoles.

75-100fps my new sweet spot

 

[StateofMajora]

60fps is my basement figure now. I'll shut AA off completely and run in potato mode before I'd go below that. 120fps should be the target. 30 should have gone away after the first gen of 3D consoles.

30fps halfway went away in gen 6, I mean there were a lot of 60 fps games even on PS2.

Then the 360 generation with its sub 30fps and screen tearing... why tho? lol.

When cross gen dies at leeeeast make 40fps the new minimum as an option devs, we have to start inching the casuals along somewhere. More 120fps modes on console would be greatly appreciated as there are still PC games being released with broken 120fps support ; we need consoles standardized 120fps to fix this.

 

[OverHeat]

75-100fps my new sweet spot

90-120 fps for newer titles is mine. That’s why I will upgrade gpu again 2080ti-3090 and next a 4090.

 

[RPSleon]

Bought a 1440p 240hz monitor to go along my almost 4K ultra wide monitor and LG CX OLED. And seriously on a 27´ monitor with a 3090 playing at high framerate is a game changer it look crisp but the main draw is the smoothness of it all 240 fps doom eternal is pure sex!

Isnt a 4k ultrawide not technically 4k?

 

[OverHeat]

Yeah it’s a little below

Isnt a 4k ultrawide not technically 4k?

 

[Zug]

I have an OLED LG G1 65 as my primary monitor, I'm about 2m away from it, and I play at 1440p (DLSS when available), even though my PC could handle more.
4k just isn't worth it at the moment with the available hardware.
Still laughing at Sony and their 2013 PS4 advertising "4K g4m1nG"

 

[rofif]

I have an OLED LG G1 65 as my primary monitor, I'm about 2m away from it, and I play at 1440p (DLSS when available), even though my PC could handle more.
4k just isn't worth it at the moment with the available hardware.
Still laughing at Sony and their 2013 PS4 advertising "4K g4m1nG"

if DLSS did not exist, 4k + TAA was the best thing.
With DLSS, a quality setting is better than 4k native. DLSS is really good !

 

[ZywyPL]

Resolution in general offers hugely diminished returns for the power required to run at a decent frame rate. I bet I could hardly tell the difference between 1440p content and 4k content on my C1, but 30FPS and 60 are night and day apart.

There are also huge diminishing returns when it comes down to Medium vs High vs Ultra settings. I personally always go down with all possible settings first until I notice the details are truly dropping down, and if I still don't get satisfying framerate only then I drop the resolution. For me native res + Ultra textures are a must.

 

[Edgelord79]

Yup. 1440p at high framerates is the best for me as well. After a certain resolution I just stop caring and want performance.

 

[64bitmodels]

HOLY FUCKING SHIT, SOMEONE FINALLY SAYS IT!!!
it's cheaper, doesn't lose as much performance, and looks drastically better than 1080p.
1440p master race bois!!!!

 

[ChorizoPicozo]

A lot of tech talk about performance and benchmarks is overrated nonsense.

4K is such a waste of resources that my butthole physically hurts.

 

[bitbydeath]

Not as overrated as 60FPS over 30FPS, IMO.

 

[ChorizoPicozo]

HOLY FUCKING SHIT, SOMEONE FINALLY SAYS IT!!!
it's cheaper, doesn't lose as much performance, and looks drastically better than 1080p.
1440p master race bois!!!!

Yikes

 

[ChorizoPicozo]

Not as overrated as 60FPS over 30FPS, IMO.

Everything is overreated and totally detached from reality.

 

[twilo99]

4K 120fps lock is godly too except you got to drop the settings a lot!

Yes of course..

300+ppi at 120fps would look amazing.

300+ppi at 240fps... drool mode

 

[It's all in the wrist]

Bro you have a tiny ass monitor...

 

[OverHeat]

Bro you have a tiny ass monitor...

65 inch 4K OLED, 38 inch ultra wide monitor and a 27 inch 1440p monitor nothing small about my setup bro.

 

[S0ULZB0URNE]

4K HDR>>>>>1440p IPS

 

[Unknown?]

32:9 way to go

Shit opinion.

9:32 is the way to go.

 

[OverHeat]

4K HDR>>>>>1440p IPS

My OLED monitor is going to be the best of both world

 

[itsjustJEFF]

i fell for the 4K marketing shit and got a 4K monitor for my PC and returned it after a week. yeah it was sharper than 1440p but after a few days i didn't care. the performance hit my games took was what really bothered me. games i could run at 60fps i was now having to run at 30-40fps. the monitor i had used VRR so between 40-60fps there wasn't much of an issue but the step up to 4K was tanking performance so that not even VRR helped.

returned it and got a 1440p 165hz monitor. i didn't expect to be able to play every game at 120-165fps but i felt like i'd prefer higher fps than resolution. so i might not manage 1440p 144fps in a game but if i can do 1440p 90fps it would still be an improvement over my old 1440p 60hz monitor.

1440p is the sweetspot between 1080p + 4K. maybe in years from now i will move to 4K but right now it's not worth it. i'm quite happy with 1440p. it's sharp enough. if i can manage 4K while keeping reasonable framerates then i can downsample. if not then i can get 60fps or higher.

I really wanted to go for a 1440p monitor, but since I also use my monitor for PS5 and work... I needed to go 4K 144hz monitor. I just run most of my PC stuff at 1440p lol

Honestly If I could, and if Sony got their shit together and supported 1440p I would have gone with the Alienware QD OLED!

 

[Dr.D00p]

1440p(otato) resolution sucks in comparison to 4K.

..and 5yrs from now, we'll have another thread titled '8K is overrated compared to 4K'

 

[Whitecrow]

1440p and 4k with TAA are almost the same.

4k with good sharper AA is another story.

 

[Kenpachii]

4k is useless and always has been, u better of getting higher framerate / higher settings going.

1440p is now useful as hardware performance in the higher segment can easily deal with the extra taxation of 1440p over 1080p. Specially with DLSS like solutions.

 

[ZehDon]

I tend to agree, as long as we're talking ultrawide. 3440x1440p is the sweet spot of performance vs visuals for me. 4k just isn't worth the FPS hit. 4k via reconstruction like DLSS is fine, but I typically push settings to max and enjoy 100FPS at 1440p ultrawide. Cyberpunk and Metro Exodus with that setup is pretty mind blowing. At native 4k, FPS would hover around 60, which while nice, just isn't as fluid.

 

[elbourreau]

 

[Kenpachii]

I tend to agree, as long as we're talking ultrawide. 3440x1440p is the sweet spot of performance vs visuals for me. 4k just isn't worth the FPS hit. 4k via reconstruction like DLSS is fine, but I typically push settings to max and enjoy 100FPS at 1440p ultrawide. Cyberpunk and Metro Exodus with that setup is pretty mind blowing. At native 4k, FPS would hover around 60, which while nice, just isn't as fluid.

yea moved to 3440x1440 ultrawide, will never go back to normal screens again, its absolutely the sweet spot for performance with DLSS and visuals.

 

[Kerotan]

Bought a 1440p 240hz monitor to go along my almost 4K ultra wide monitor and LG CX OLED. And seriously on a 27´ monitor with a 3090 playing at high framerate is a game changer it look crisp but the main draw is the smoothness of it all 240 fps doom eternal is pure sex!

In 10 years time do you see yourself playing on a 480fps monitor or have you hit the limit where you can't notice anything better?

 

[Dr.D00p]

yea moved to 3440x1440 ultrawide, will never go back to normal screens again, its absolutely the sweet spot for performance with DLSS and visuals.

Ultrawide is nice for pure gaming and nothing but gaming but there are too many shortcomings for everything else. From lack of resolution support in any game over a few years old to being practically useless for emulation, and the vertical height being too narrow for desktop application use.

 

[nominedomine]

In 10 years time do you see yourself playing on a 480fps monitor or have you hit the limit where you can't notice anything better?

The improvement I noticed going from 360fps to 480fps is bigger than what I felt going from 24fps to 60fps.

People tend to underestimate how strong the placebo effect can be, thats why I love native 4K despite the fact that I can't tell if a game is running at native 4K or not.

 

[Tiago Rodrigues]

This topic just made me think how TV brands will have a hard time to market 8k gaming. No wonder you already have brands like TCL trying to talk about non-existing consoles to sell those screens in a few years lmao.

We're hitting that point where these resolution bumps just aren't worth the framerate sacrifices in anyway. 4k should be the standard for quite a while.

Going from an LCD to an OLED was way more important to me than going from gaming at 1440p to a 4k screen, in my opinion.

About the OP...i mean yeah if you play on a monitor at 1440p bumping that to 4k won't be noticeable. On a big TV you can notice that difference quite a lot though.

 

[Kenpachii]

Ultrawide is nice for pure gaming and nothing but gaming but there are too many shortcomings for everything else. From lack of resolution support in any game over a few years old to being practically useless for emulation, and the vertical height being too narrow for desktop application use.

It's a full blown 1440p 27 inch screen with extra room on the sides. So if you call it too narrow for desktop application u call every other 1440p screen to narrow while at it.

Honestly i have maybe 1 issue with final fantasy 7 ( but what to expect from japanse devs, they tend to have shitty pc ports ) but soon after people fixed that also. Emulation botw cemu it works perfectly fine, older emulation titles not sure never really care much for older emulators, and new games even sony games all support the resolution perfectly fine straight out of the gate. It's absolutely amazing for practically any title for gaming, good for desktop use because more screen space then a 1440p screen etc etc.

Honestly feels like you have a outdated look on ultrawide. I had my doubts about it when i first moved towards it, but frankly after using it for a year there is no hair on my body that ever wants to return to 16:9 it feels claustrophobic.

 

[ZywyPL]

This topic just made me think how TV brands will have a hard time to market 8k gaming.

With the infamous tiger image of course:

 

[Tiago Rodrigues]

With the infamous tiger image of course:

Does anyone fall for this? lmao

 

[FukuDaruma]

You can apply the same logic to 1080p. 1080p on 21 inch screen looks great. But 1440p on 70 inch TV looks like complete ass.

Viewing distance matters. Screen size matters.

You are right, viewing distance matters. And if 1440p on your 70" TV looks like ass it's either because you are too near or your TV scaling is ass.
1440p in my 120" projector screen looks amazing, at 3.4 meters. There's very little difference with 4K. Screen size, proper distance and good 60fps or more are A LOT more important than 4K resolution.

1440p should be an option for consoles.

 

[LaughingStock]

1440p is the sweet spot.

Can't wait for my AW3423DW (OLED, ultrawide 34" monitor).

 

[MidGenRefresh]

You are right, viewing distance matters. And if 1440p on your 70" TV looks like ass it's either because you are too near or your TV scaling is ass.
1440p in my 120" projector screen looks amazing, at 3.4 meters. There's very little difference with 4K. Screen size, proper distance and good 60fps or more are A LOT more important than 4K resolution.

1440p should be an option for consoles.

We’re talking flat panels, not projectors. Viewing distance = intended viewing distance that’s appropriate for the size of the screen. 720p will look okay on 70inch 4k TV if you look at it from 15 meters.

 

[Gamezone]

4K is overrated on PC because it's too demanding. On a 27" monitor it doesn't look that much better, but the PC requirements are much higher, and downscaling to 1440p on a 4K monitor looks worse than running 1440p on a native monitor.

 

[FukuDaruma]

We’re talking flat panels, not projectors. Viewing distance = intended viewing distance that’s appropriate for the size of the screen. 720p will look okay on 70inch 4k TV if you look at it from 15 meters.

There's no need for hyperbole. The proper viewing distance for a 70" screen is 9.8ft/3 meters, which is pretty near of what I'm at with my 120" screen (3.35 meters). And 1440p doesn't look "like ass" at that distance, it looks very good.

But my point is: 1440p is really the sweet spot. 4K is unnecessary and it tanks performance, which is A LOT more important than resolution at that point. 1440p should be mandatory as a console games option.

 

[MidGenRefresh]

There's no need for hyperbole. The proper viewing distance for a 70" screen is 9.8ft/3 meters, which is pretty near of what I'm at my 120" screen (3.35 meters). And 1440p doesn't look "like ass" at that distance, it looks very good.

TV != Projector, get it?

 

[FukuDaruma]

TV != Projector, get it?

I also have an LG OLED55GX6LA, and the differences are in other areas (blacks, reflections, etc), not resolution. You can't say it "looks like ass" if you are NOT at the PROPER distance.

 

[MidGenRefresh]

I also have an LG OLED55GX6LA, and the differences are in other areas (blacks, reflections, etc), not resolution. You can't say it "looks like ass" if you are NOT at the PROPER distance.

Ok, I should probably add one more thing to my list of what matters:

- viewing distance matters
- screen size matters
- your eyesight matters

Everything other than a native 4k resolution on a 4k panel, from a intended viewing distance will look like complete ass compared to native image

 

[Negotiator101]

4K is sharper than a chefs carving knife. 1440p is more like a knife you butter your toast with.

 

[Klik]

To be honest i think i'm ok with 1440p/144hz for next 5 years..

 

[Crayon]

Native 1440 to native 4k, I can't tell the difference on my tv unless they are sidde by side. And I have a decent eye. Some games have good enough anti aliasing that i don't mind a softer 1080 image.

No big on a console where I don't have a choice but when it comes to choosing a gpu... $$$

 

[Soapbox Killer]

For me, an Xbox Series S on a 1440p VRR monitor is the best value in current gen gaming. $600 and you can be sitting relatively solid. The gaming experience of Gears 5 @120fps on a 1440p Pixio277 monitor feels good.


I do have a Series X and a Steam Deck to compare "current" gen.

 

[FukuDaruma]

Ok, I should probably add one more thing to my list of what matters:

- viewing distance matters
- screen size matters
- your eyesight matters

Everything other than a native 4k resolution on a 4k panel, from a intended viewing distance will look like complete ass compared to native image

Sure, dude, go check yours then.

No, it does NOT, not even at half the PROPER viewing distance. But lame hyperbole is great reference and 4K foreva because labels and brands told you so, and unless you are at 15 meters everything else looks "like complete ass".