4K Importance to you in 2014

[jackstar7]

Want to see DP 1.3 hit the mainstream before making the next move. And then I want to see someone actually take advantage of it.

 

[DigDog]

Not important at all; i can't wait for G-Sync, however.

 

[tential]

I get the feeling that this forum is very gamer-heavy, and 4K isn't really going to be a great option for "AAA" gaming for some time; you need at least two top-end cards in SLI or Crossfire, and even then, the settings have to be turned down to keep frame rates up; for gamers, things will probably look about as good at 2560x1440 with all the bells and whistles, and frame rates can be more consistent.

Where 4K really shines is on applications where you want more working space. Photo editing, for instance - even a cheap digital camera can take pictures with a resolution greater than standard monitors. Or if you actually want to use the multi-tasking features of your OS, and have multiple windows open at the same time, able to quickly switch between them. (I know, as Windows 8 indicates, even Microsoft seems to have forgotten that people actually do this.) 39" monitors would work really well for this, assuming any are actually released. (The Seiki TV works OK for people who are satisfied with 30 Hz, but I need 60 Hz for when I'm watching videos or firing up Nestopia or bsnes.)

Looks like 2 290s or 2 290xs can run a lot of games at great settings but I see your point.

I'd thought about hopping on the 4K wagon but reading this thread puts me back to reality. It was only appealing for gaming but 1080p + AA is probably better than 4K on medium settings.

I'd expected some people with TriSLI/CF setups to come in the thread though and say they'd been running at 4K for awhile. I'm more excited for HEVC than 4K but that's a whole different topic =D. I'll be even more excited when people like netflix/hulu etc. start streaming with it and cut down the bitrate we need to get full HD.

 

[Lonbjerg]

Not important for me in 2014.
Not enough content.

 

[JumBie]

So anyone know if I can hook up my PC to a 4k tv, and output my desktop and games at 4k? And if so how much fps am i limited to?

 

[Paul98]

I will be looking at 4k when 4k projectors come down in price. Seems like with the speed they are coming it may not be that long.

 

[cmdrdredd]

So anyone know if I can hook up my PC to a 4k tv, and output my desktop and games at 4k? And if so how much fps am i limited to?

You can but only at 30Hz over HDMI. FPS is limited to how much you can spend on hardware.

 

[JumBie]

You can but only at 30Hz over HDMI. FPS is limited to how much you can spend on hardware.

Well that's definitely not worth it, Id have to ATLEAST be able to game at 60fps for me to even bother investing in a 4k tv.

 

[RockinZ28]

Have no interest. Definitely not if it's an LCD.

Infinitely more interested in the Oculus Rift.

 

[tential]

Well that's definitely not worth it, Id have to ATLEAST be able to game at 60fps for me to even bother investing in a 4k tv.

You can use display port to get to 60hz. As for 60FPS. Well, that depends on hardware. Interesting to see what 2014 Hardware from NV and AMD has to offer. Considering how much 4K was talked about with AMD's R9, I'm expecting it to mean a lot to Nvidia/AMD benchmark wise even if it means nothing to many consumers.

 

[JumBie]

You can use display port to get to 60hz. As for 60FPS. Well, that depends on hardware. Interesting to see what 2014 Hardware from NV and AMD has to offer. Considering how much 4K was talked about with AMD's R9, I'm expecting it to mean a lot to Nvidia/AMD benchmark wise even if it means nothing to many consumers.

Doesn't seem to be much 4k TV's that have a display port input.

Or cant I wait for HDMI 2.0 4k displays

 

[rgallant]

I'm just curious how important to you is the ability of your video card(or cards) to be able to push 4K content on your TV? After CES, we've seen a LOT of 4K HDTVs, and a company (I forget which I just read the article this week), that they will commit to bringing a 4K HDTV under 1K, and we already have multiple ones.

We can also assume that 4K Monitors will be coming this year as well with the amount of HDTVs we saw during CES 2014 that were 4K capable.

So I just would like to know:
How important is being able to push 4K pixels in 2014?
When do you plan to make the jump to a 4K capable display (2014, 2015, 2016????)?

Been getting real antsy as I've recently seen a commitment during CES to bring a 70 inch HDTV under 3k (I paid around 2.3K for mine so on sale, that new one will be quite similar in price).

-did not read the whole thread
-4k monitors will be useless with nv cards @ 3gb vram , have doubts my lowly $1200.00 cards can keep up @ 1440 when new games are [IF]/released using newer engines --no hope for 4k hahahahaha nvtaxnvtaxnvtax.
-no next gen. games [end of 2014 maybe] TO TEST TODAY -milking ps3 /xbox user's is more important to the dev's
-like any new tech. something will be a trade off ,lag, response time.
-give it 2 years
4k for tv steaming = good luck

haha sli\cf haters won't be playing at 4k in this gpu paradigm
http://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/gtx_780_ti_sli_geforce_review,22.html

 

[alawadhi3000]

Not interested since I already sit seven feets away from the display.
At that distance I doubt I'll see a difference between 1080p and 4K on a 40 inch display.

 

[staryoshi]

4K is one of those technologies that I'm putting in a time capsule and checking in on in 2-3 years. I'm quite happy with my u2713hm.

 

[KlokWyze]

Couldn't care less. I'm never on the cutting edge with much. I always go for cost effectiveness. Everyone here knows that comes AFTER the stuff gets widely adopted. TBH, not much point if nothing is being broadcast or configured to use said resolution.

 

[ShintaiDK]

In terms of 4K, remember. No GPU with HDMI 2.0 or DP1.3 yet. And Since DP1.2 can only show 4K 30Hz in a single stream. Current displays got dual scalar to use 2 streams. And thats anything but problem free.

4K without HDMI 2.0 or DP 1.3, including GPU support is simply not worth it.

 

[blastingcap]

I'm just curious how important to you is the ability of your video card(or cards) to be able to push 4K content on your TV? After CES, we've seen a LOT of 4K HDTVs, and a company (I forget which I just read the article this week), that they will commit to bringing a 4K HDTV under 1K, and we already have multiple ones.

We can also assume that 4K Monitors will be coming this year as well with the amount of HDTVs we saw during CES 2014 that were 4K capable.

So I just would like to know:
How important is being able to push 4K pixels in 2014?
When do you plan to make the jump to a 4K capable display (2014, 2015, 2016????)?

Been getting real antsy as I've recently seen a commitment during CES to bring a 70 inch HDTV under 3k (I paid around 2.3K for mine so on sale, that new one will be quite similar in price).

I don't care about 4K per se, but I do care about 3K because I run three 1080p panels in an Eyefinity array. So I would say that a graphic card's ability to push 4K is very relevant to me in 2014. In fact, it's been relevant to me since I got my triple 1080p panels a couple of years ago.

 

[JDG1980]

In terms of 4K, remember. No GPU with HDMI 2.0 or DP1.3 yet. And Since DP1.2 can only show 4K 30Hz in a single stream. Current displays got dual scalar to use 2 streams.

I was under the impression that this was not an inherent limit of DP 1.2, but a limit of the receiver ICs that are currently shipping.

 

[SlickR12345]

My 20inch monitor is perfectly fine thank you.

I mean I can't imagine playing games on a bigger monitor than say 23'. The bigger it is the bigger the area you have to look at and that is impossible unless you sit back and for PC gaming your monitor sits at a desk and you sit about 30cm up to one one meter apart, so you can't really sit back 2 meters from it.

I don't see the need for such monitors, I don't see the need in graphics, like bigger resolution doesn't mean better graphics, better graphics means better graphics, bigger resolution makes AA a little bit less needed, but still that's the primary advantage.

I'd rather see a way more detailed and highly textured game with tons of polygons and using the already existent DX11 features, rather than a 4k game.

AS far as movies, its pretty much the same deal, the quality doesn't really go up and again you already have big TV's for such things, I don't see the need for a PC monitor that big to watch movies.