For good 4k gaming you need a 1080 or ti. Its just better to do lower res and higher fps since you wont notice the difference in most games atleast from what I have seen. I also suppose you would need a more recent cpu for 4k gaming, not entirely sure.
Thats all I got.
Comment has been collapsed.
Thanks, I definitely won't be getting a 4k display then
Comment has been collapsed.
If 4k will help with work, get it as it's fine to run games at 1080p on a 4k monitor. They scale perfectly.
Comment has been collapsed.
While that's kind of true, running games in 1080p on a 4k monitor does NOT look as good as playing on a native 1080p monitor. Running anything in 1080p on a 4k monitor looks a little fuzzy / blurry and is not as good as a 1k monitor. You'd think it would, but it does not, as it's a misconception that the monitor will just downscale to 1k - it's the opposite: The 1080p actually has to UPSCALE to 4k making it look a little unsharp.
I learned this the hard way with my 4k monitor.
Not to mention scaling of things like older versions of PhotoShop and many applications/games (including Steam Client) can have issues at 4k.
Comment has been collapsed.
He doesn't need a new CPU for 4K gaming, CPUs can bottleneck at 1080p. To handle 4K, the GPU power is what count the most so a 1080 Ti or better wait for what Volta (Ampere) will bring to the table.
Comment has been collapsed.
Agreed. Having around 11GB of VRAM will be very helpful for 4k. A 1080ti would still be hard pressed to get high fps with 4k, but the Volta might just reach the bare minimum for solid frame rates for gaming.
Since you are doing graphic design and I am guessing editing extremely large pictures, you should look into getting 32GB of RAM if you are doing heavy loads. At least 16GB for that sort of stuff.
Comment has been collapsed.
Your dad is wrong. All you need is a 1060 or better and maybe another 8GB of RAM. An SSD for your OS and main programmes would also be a nice boost if you don't have one already.
If you're happy with your moniotr and the colours ares till ok I don't see a need to upgrade.
Edit: For high frames at 4K you'll need a 1080 or 1080Ti
Comment has been collapsed.
To that edit: still baffles me why people think 4k is the new thing when only the 1080 can show potential.
Comment has been collapsed.
Yeah, it's just all about the hype. Same like those Racing seats for gamers ....
Comment has been collapsed.
I use one of em its not a fancy branded one its pretty comfy and great for my back being tall, somewhat cheap because most others are super expensive in Australia like the DELUXE DXRACER EXTREME KING CHAIR PREMIUM SOLID GOLD or D.D.E.K.C.P.R.S.G. for short.
Comment has been collapsed.
Thanks, that pretty much what I thought. I'm going to keep what I have now and maybe upgrade in the future when I actually need it. Thankfully I already have an SSD :)
Comment has been collapsed.
I have 4k monitor with a 1060 (6gb VRAM) and 16Gb RAM.
Many games will run just fine in 4k resolution but - tearing is an issue and requires vsync in almost all cases (Unless the monitor has gsync - bearing in mind nVidia does not support freesync monitors)
So you'd be fps capped at 30 or 60fps in 4k
Games that achieve this include GTAV or DOOM and look run great with settings on high or even max in some games.
A few games with the 1060/4k combo just can't handle it, and require dropping to 2k and even 1k occasionally. ARK Survival is one that battles in 4k for me (Although have not tried since going out of EA)
Just remember though, that a game in 1080p will ALWAYS look better on a 1080p monitor than on a 4k monitor. Running anything in 1080p on a 4k monitor looks a little fuzzy / blurry and is not as good as a 1k monitor. You'd think it would, but it does not, as it's a misconception that the monitor will just downscale to 1k - it's the opposite: The 1080p actually has to UPSCALE to 4k making it look a little unsharp
Comment has been collapsed.
Why a 75Hz? Generally there are 60, 120, 144 classes.
More often than not 75 just means it will accept the signal but it's been oc'ed
Edit: Like cheap chinese imports here in EU.
Edit: Correction, Hz not FPS
Comment has been collapsed.
Thanks, I'll let my dad know that.
I usually play old games, indie games or games from bundles so I don't even need my pc to run the newest hits on max settings anyways. I have humble beggings, if the game runs, I play and don't really care much about how it looks lol
Comment has been collapsed.
You said you're a photographer and do graphic design aswell, is that your priority over gaming ?
If so, picture quality/colors should be the top priority. You're already using an IPS panel which is nice because for that purpose it's the way to go. I'm not entirely sure on this but i believe you would get a REAL benefit from getting a higher res and size monitor; as long as it's well calibrated and does produce great colors.
Comment has been collapsed.
4k is overrated right now. Not many games have full 4k potential. Sure you can run it at 4k resolution but I think most games are upscalled 1080p anyway. Also 4k60 you'll beed a pretty good PC for a heafy game. It's not worth it.
However... if you can get a 4k monitor/TV for a good price. Sure why not. you'll get a great picture even at 1080P and you'll be ready for the future! Also you can watch 4k movies on it... why not right?
EDIT : Yea make sure it's a GOOD 4k... some are FAKE and only do 1440P or 2160P which is "techinally" UHD/4k but not really. Get something that is literally going to display 3k+ resolutions!
Comment has been collapsed.
All 16:9 4K displays are UHD/4K = 3840x2160 (4x FullHD) đ
agree with some fakes not do over 1440p or similar
Comment has been collapsed.
There is no such thing as fake 4K. There is UHD, which is 3840 Ă 2160 and the DCI one which is a different aspect ratio. There is no 4K that is 1440p and 2160p is 4K.
The games on PC are being rendered in 4K, there is no upscaling. If there was upscaling of rendered 1080p frames, you wouldn't see a 1070 struggle to maintain a good frame rate on 4K.
Comment has been collapsed.
I think he meant the monitor, not the game. There are low-end televisions advertised as 4K that use RGBW subpixels - more of a 3K TV with extra black-and-white pixels, the effects of which may be more pronounced if you use the TV as a monitor. Youâre more likely to see aliasing around text or UI elements on a monitor than a TV showing a movie or TV program, for example. Even text on a guide screen or subtitles tends not to need to be as sharp as text on a PC.
Comment has been collapsed.
If that's what he meant, he phrased it horribly. :D
Comment has been collapsed.
https://realorfake4k.com/ Oh really? I was speaking more about other media and some TV's not dispalying full 4K
Comment has been collapsed.
This has absolutely nothing to do with the TV. It's whether the movie was shot and distributed in 4K or shot in 2K, upscaled to 4K and distributed that way.
Please, next time before trying to correct me, learn a thing or 2 'cause you end up sounding dumb.
Comment has been collapsed.
This should go into /r/i'mverysmart. I never said it was ONLY about videogames or TVs or monitors.... learn to READ yourself there buddy.
Comment has been collapsed.
No surprise you are a Reddit user. I'm perfectly capable reading your non-sense. At this point, there either is a language barrier and I can't understand your terribly presented thoughts, or you are absolutely clueless merging two completely irrelevant facts into one.
I'll say it once again, 'cause you seem to be as dumb as a log. The link you sent has absolutely nothing to do with whether the TV or monitor is 4K or not, it has strictly to do with whether the media shown is shot and mastered in 4K or not, which has absolutely nothing to do with the display itself. The only time a 4K display is not "real" 4K is when white pixels are used and even in this case you end up with a 4K resolution but with some pixels that are not capable of producing colours.
I'm now out. You are too ignorant on the subject and at the same time you are not willing to understand, so at this point it a waste of time.
Comment has been collapsed.
You seem to have a good setup, it's better than mine and I have yet to come across a game that refuses to run for me. Maybe add more ram, it's no rare for programs nowadays to use a couple GBs each so more ram never hurts.
Comment has been collapsed.
not worth, atm only worthful display is oled so you should buy oled tv (still no oled monitors) and use it via hdmi. when you want to play strategies etc. (which could be a bit risky for plasma/oled) than look for good lcd for your eyes, 4k would not be that imporant, that all.
Comment has been collapsed.
I don't think 4K is worth it and it is very difficult to run games at a decent frame rate. If you are going to spend $600 on a monitor, I would get a 144hz IPS 1440P monitor (half way between 1080P and 4K. Edit: I was wrong, it's less than half). At 1440P, you will not get good frame rates on the highest game settings with a GTX 970 or 1060, but it will be fine if you are willing to turn some of the settings down for now and then when you upgrade your GPU again in the future, you can keep the same monitor and run the highest in game settings.
Here's some benchmarks at 1440P. All games shown here are run on the highest in game settings, so you can get the frame rate higher if you turn them down a bit: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lBlCUV6TwiY
These monitors are usually around $600-700 (US prices), but for some reason most of them are around $800 right now. Pixio just released one that is $400 or a little under.
Acer Predator XB271HU
ViewSonic XG2703-GS
AOC AG271QG
ASUS MG279Q
Pixio New PX277 (make sure it says "new", there was an older PX277) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cB5RRdTi9bY
Comment has been collapsed.
1440p is not in between, as the ppi on 1440p is way closer to 1080p than to 4K.
Some numbers as a reference for a 27" monitor:
1080p = 92 ppi
1440p =109 ppi
4K = 163 ppi
Comment has been collapsed.
I didn't know that, I always thought it was right in the middle. Either way, I would still prefer 1440P for gaming with the current and probably next generation video cards.
Comment has been collapsed.
I completely agree on that part, just wanted to clarify it:)
Comment has been collapsed.
I've been using a 28" Samsung 4K monitor for the past three and a half years now (one of the first "affordable" ones released) mostly for photography/video editing and multimedia work and I wouldn't dream of going back to anything with fewer pixels now. Working with photos and video at this resolution has been a true game-changer, the clarity of the image is in a different league entirely compared to, say, 1080p (or even 1440p). Colours could be better on my newer gen TN panel, but they are much better than they ought to be for a non-IPS screen. One thing to bear in mind though is that at normal viewing distances for 3840 x 2160 pixels at 28 inches (or 27 in the case of the Benq you mention), UI scaling becomes a necessity as text and menu items become almost illegible at 1:1 scale. I have my screen set to 125% or 150% scaling to accommodate this pixel density which means that while raster images (photos and video) are displayed at native res, application and OS menus are scaled and end up taking up a bit more screen real estate than I would have hoped. It's still way more display space than what you would be used to at 1080p, it just doesn't end up being the full 4x that the raw pixel count of the display would imply, once scaling comes into play. (Also the software should ideally support HiDPI scaling, a lot of still doesn't properly on Windows). This may not be a huge issue, but It's something to keep in mind. If I ever get to actually upgrading my current screen (whenever that may be) I plan on getting at least a 32" or even (a frankly ridiculous) 40" monitor so I can drive it at 100% scaling and make use of that screen real estate to its fullest.
As for gaming, playing at full-fat 4K is awesome, no question about it. I'm still on a venerable AMD R9 290 which is comparable to your GTX 970, and I find I can get by more often than not, even surprisingly so, by lowering a setting here and there and still play at acceptable frame rates (although I'm always one for image quality rather than refresh rate). For recent-ish "triple-A" titles it is getting admittedly challenging which is why I often resort to 2560 x 1440 for demanding games. The good news is that scaling at this resolution is more than acceptable, sure the image isn't as tack sharp as at native 4K but it's still very good indeed. That doesn't hold true for 1080p, however, as the blur introduced by the non-integer scaling method becomes much more pronounced. I don't know how good the scaling on the Benq is, but I would check that it holds up for at least displaying games at 1440p, because you may need to resort to this lower resolution for gaming, depending on the situation.
To sum up, graphics and multimedia work at 4K is amazing, the image clarity is a game-changer but UI scaling is a factor you should keep in mind if you're going for 27-28" and not something larger. Gaming at 4K rocks but you may end up running demanding games at a lower 1440p which may or may not end up scaling well on your monitor of choice. The i5-4690K is still good enough (especially overclocked), 8 gigs of RAM will be enough for most if not all situations (unless you're playing the newest CoD which reportedly demands 12 GB to run very well) and your CPU doesn't really matter at this resolution anyway as your graphics card will be the bottleneck.
Comment has been collapsed.
The Geforce 1060 6GB performance is nearly identical to the 970, just with more vram.
Comment has been collapsed.
i can get through an sgtools but i can't get through a blacklist
Comment has been collapsed.
Long story short - my dad wants to buy me a new monitor and a new pc and keep the one I have rn for himself I'm not that fond of the idea
The new monitor would be BenQ BL2711U (4K 27") for 13 000 Czk (=600 USD) / or some similar alternative
My old one is Benq BL2411 (1920x1200 24") that cost me around 6 000 Czk (=300 USD)
I'm a photographer and I also do graphic design. I'm content with my current monitor and I have no need to get a new one unless it'd be really worth it.
My current pc (from 2015) has Nvidia GTX 970, 8GB of ram and Intel Core i5-4690K
My dad wants to buy a new pc that's at least as good or a bit better with the newest components. What would be a good new alternative to 970, if there's any...
(My dad pretty much thinks that technology is moving so fast that my old pc is outdated now and that instead of buying a cheaper office pc for my dad and leaving my old one to me we should buy a new super computer for me. I'm not sure if he's right but he is pretty stubborn)
When it comes to gaming, I'm used to playing on my 6 years old laptop on the lowest settings so graphics isn't important to me. I suppose gaming in 4k would require a more powerful computer, would my current pc be enough?
Mandatory GA (one game, sgtools, lvl2+)
EDIT: I'm keeping my current pc and monitor with possible upgrade of RAM/GPU in the future. I also might buy a better monitor in the future for my work but it isn't as important now. Thank you all for your help, it helped a lot.
Comment has been collapsed.