undefined | Better HN

0 pointsericfrederich1y ago0 comments

4k gaming is dumb. I watched a LTT video that came out today where Linus said he primarily uses gaming monitors and doesn't mess with 4k.

0 comments

kcb1y ago

No it's not. 2560x1440 has terrible PPI on larger screens. Either way with a 4k monitor you don't technically need to game at 4k as most intensive games offer DLSS anyway.

perching_aix1y ago

What matters is the PPD, not the PPI, otherwise it's an unsound comparison.

kcb1y ago

Too much personal preference with PPD. When I upgraded to a 32" monitor from a 27" one i didn't push my display through my wall, it sat in the same position.

1 more reply

snvzz1y ago

And FSR, which is cross gpu vendor.

SirMaster1y ago

Not anymore. FSR4 is AMD only, and only the new RDNA4 GPUs.

1 more reply

zeroonetwothree1y ago

Yep. I have both 4k and 1440p monitors and I can’t tell the difference in quality so I always use the latter for better frames. I use the 4k for reading text though, it’s noticeably better.

munchbunny1y ago

That's why I also finally went from 1920x1200 to 4k about half a year ago. It was mostly for reading text and programming, not gaming.

I can tell the difference in games if I go looking for it, but in the middle of a tense shootout I honestly don't notice that I have double the DPI.

Our_Benefactors1y ago

There are good 4K gaming monitors, but they start at over $1200 and if you don't also have a 4090 tier rig, you won’t be able to get full FPS out of AAA games at 4k.

archagon1y ago

I still have a 3080 and game at 4K/120Hz. Most AAA games that I try can pull 60-90Hz at ~4K if DLSS is available.

valzam1y ago

Most numbers people are touting are from "Ultra everything benchmarks", lowering the settings + DLLS makes 4k perfectly playable.

1 more reply

out_of_protocol1y ago

Also, ultrawide monitors. They exist, provide more immersion. And typical resolution is 3440x1440 which is high and and the same time have low ppi (basically regular 27" 1440p monitor with extra width). Doubling that is way outside modern GPU capabilities

FuriouslyAdrift1y ago

A coworker who is really into flight sims runs 6 ultrawide curved monitors to get over 180 degrees around his head.

I have to admit with the display wrapping around into peripheral vision, it is very immersive.

valzam1y ago

Almost no one plays on native 4k anyway. DLSS Quality (no framegen etc) renders at 1440p internally and by all accounts there is no drawback at all, especially above 60fps. Looks great, no noticeable (excluding super sweaty esports titles) lag and 30% more performance. Combined with VRR displays, I would say 4k is perfectly ok for gaming.

akimbostrawman1y ago

Taking anything Linus or LTT says seriously is even dumber....

ggregoire1y ago

I watched the same video you talking about [1], where he's trying the PG27UCDM (new 27" 4K 240Hz OLED "gaming monitor" [2]) and his first impressions are "it's so clean and sharp", then he starts Doom Eternal and after a few seconds he says "It's insane [...] It looks perfect".

[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iQ404RCyqhk

[2] https://rog.asus.com/monitors/27-to-31-5-inches/rog-swift-ol...

Yeul1y ago

Nonsense 4k gaming was inevitable as soon as 4k TVs got mainstream.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse

0 comments

kcb1y ago

No it's not. 2560x1440 has terrible PPI on larger screens. Either way with a 4k monitor you don't technically need to game at 4k as most intensive games offer DLSS anyway.

perching_aix1y ago

What matters is the PPD, not the PPI, otherwise it's an unsound comparison.

kcb1y ago

Too much personal preference with PPD. When I upgraded to a 32" monitor from a 27" one i didn't push my display through my wall, it sat in the same position.

1 more reply

snvzz1y ago

And FSR, which is cross gpu vendor.

SirMaster1y ago

Not anymore. FSR4 is AMD only, and only the new RDNA4 GPUs.

1 more reply

zeroonetwothree1y ago

Yep. I have both 4k and 1440p monitors and I can’t tell the difference in quality so I always use the latter for better frames. I use the 4k for reading text though, it’s noticeably better.

munchbunny1y ago

That's why I also finally went from 1920x1200 to 4k about half a year ago. It was mostly for reading text and programming, not gaming.

I can tell the difference in games if I go looking for it, but in the middle of a tense shootout I honestly don't notice that I have double the DPI.

Our_Benefactors1y ago

There are good 4K gaming monitors, but they start at over $1200 and if you don't also have a 4090 tier rig, you won’t be able to get full FPS out of AAA games at 4k.

archagon1y ago

I still have a 3080 and game at 4K/120Hz. Most AAA games that I try can pull 60-90Hz at ~4K if DLSS is available.

valzam1y ago

Most numbers people are touting are from "Ultra everything benchmarks", lowering the settings + DLLS makes 4k perfectly playable.

1 more reply

out_of_protocol1y ago

FuriouslyAdrift1y ago

A coworker who is really into flight sims runs 6 ultrawide curved monitors to get over 180 degrees around his head.

I have to admit with the display wrapping around into peripheral vision, it is very immersive.

valzam1y ago

akimbostrawman1y ago

Taking anything Linus or LTT says seriously is even dumber....

ggregoire1y ago

[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iQ404RCyqhk

[2] https://rog.asus.com/monitors/27-to-31-5-inches/rog-swift-ol...

Yeul1y ago

Nonsense 4k gaming was inevitable as soon as 4k TVs got mainstream.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse