[SOLVED] 4k 240hz?

[Pupq1]

When should we expect 4k 240hz, but also with hdr and good screen quality monitors? About how much will they be? And by the time those come out, will there be a graphics card that can do 4k 240hz? (I'm talking single gpu, not sli)

 

[Eximo]

Well, the DP 2.0 spec theoretically supports 4K 240hz. That was just released in June, so going to be a while before that makes it into anything, let alone displays.

Short answer, a few years and really expensive. Going to need a fast LCD panel, a really fast scalar, etc.

GPUs to do it would need to be about three times faster than they are. Not seeing that in the next few years. Not a huge market for it yet.

 

[Pupq1]

Yeah I think you are right. But, 4k 240hz hdr and a gpu to handle that is pretty much guaranteed in future, right?

 

[King_V]

Yeah I think you are right. But, 4k 240hz hdr and a gpu to handle that is pretty much guaranteed in future, right?

Why do you ask?

Technically, I suppose, you could get this right now if you had the money. Spend the dough to get someone to custom-engineer that kind of monitor and a powerful enough video card. I mean, that will make it a a one-off and will cost a fortune, but it can be done.

I'm not sure what the purpose of your question is.

 

[Pupq1]

Why do you ask?

Technically, I suppose, you could get this right now if you had the money. Spend the dough to get someone to custom-engineer that kind of monitor and a powerful enough video card. I mean, that will make it a a one-off and will cost a fortune, but it can be done.

I'm not sure what the purpose of your question is.

I'm asking if, as now for example 4k 60hz or 1440p 200hz is a common thing now, in the future normal people and gamers will be using 4k 240hz

 

[cryoburner]

Perhaps that will be practical in 10 years? : P Its probably not worth concerning yourself with at the moment, as 144 Hz 4K monitors have just started to appear, and they are typically priced in the $1000+ range for even just a 27" display. And even today's fastest $1000+ graphics cards can't push 144fps at 4K in recent games, so anything higher than that would not be particularly useful for some years. The only 240Hz screens available now are at 1080p resolution.

Plus, as raytraced lighting effects catch on, it will likely become even harder to even maintain playable frame rates in games set to max graphics settings at 4K. The handful of games that support raytracing so far require a top-end graphics card just to maintain 60fps at 1080p with those effects enabled, and it may be a few years before new top-end cards can push raytracing at 60fps at 4K, let alone 144Hz or higher.

 

[TJ Hooker]

I'm asking if, as now for example 4k 60hz or 1440p 200hz is a common thing now, in the future normal people and gamers will be using 4k 240hz

IIRC the vast majority of people are still on 1080p (or less), at least based on Steam surveys. I would not consider even 4K60Hz or 1440p/144Hz gaming to be mainstream yet.

 

[WildCard999]

I'm asking if, as now for example 4k 60hz or 1440p 200hz is a common thing now, in the future normal people and gamers will be using 4k 240hz

It may become a normal thing years down the road but currently 65% of gamers are using 1080P per Steam survey.
https://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey/Steam-Hardware-Software-Survey-Welcome-to-Steam

 

[Pupq1]

IIRC the vast majority of people are still on 1080p (or less), at least based on Steam surveys. I would not consider even 4K60Hz or 1440p/144Hz gaming to be mainstream yet.

Yeah not mainstream but common I'd say

 

[WildCard999]

By the time 4K/144 or 240hz becomes common we'll probably be at like 15K/10,000hz or some ridiculous refresh rate.

I'd be pleasantly surprised though if they do stop at a certain refresh rate.

 

[Phaaze88]

Yeah not mainstream but common I'd say

Synonyms...

 

[NightHawkRMX]

Yeah I think you are right. But, 4k 240hz hdr and a gpu to handle that is pretty much guaranteed in future, right?

It might say take longer than you think. Because as hardware gets better, the games will get more demanding. So if hardware just a few years from now may be able to run 4k 240hz in today's games, it may not in the titles relevant then.

 

[jsmithepa]

Shinnier, newer better? Did you know currently commercially made 4K movies incorporate 2K (only) CGI sequences because it takes too long to render them in 4K?

 

[TJ Hooker]

Consider that 4K60Hz gaming was starting to gain attention as early as 2013-2014, and today you still need to spend $1000 on a 2080 Ti to be able to get 4K 60+ FPS in every game at max settings. I'm sure it won't be long until games come out where even a 2080 Ti can't manage 60+ FPS. And of course if you factor ray tracing into 'max settings' then we're still nowhere close.

 

[King_V]

I'm asking if, as now for example 4k 60hz or 1440p 200hz is a common thing now, in the future normal people and gamers will be using 4k 240hz

200-240Hz at lower resolutions isn't normal now - though obviously it's available. It's bragging rights for the few who have convinced themselves they can see that speed and who call themselves competitive gamers.

Time progresses. It eventually will be a thing for gamers who have too much to spend, if the economics of it make it worthwhile for companies to develop.

 

[Pupq1]

Synonyms...

They are common amomgst enthusiasts and there are a lot of enthusiasts

 

[gamerk316]

Well, HDMI 2.1 supports that resolution/refresh rate, so I guess as soon as NVIDIA/AMD put out HDMI 2.1 capable GPUs someone could make a monitor at that resolution.

DP won't support that combination until DP 2.0 hits, likely in 18 months or so.

 

[chickenballs]

a 2080Ti with a 9900K may be able to give you 200fps+ in games like Dota or csgo
but not in more recent and demanding titles