AMD GPUs In 2016: HDR, FreeSync Over HDMI And New Standards

Status
Not open for further replies.

red77star

Honorable
Oct 16, 2013
230
0
10,680
0
I am still gaming on 1080p which I found more than enough. 4K monitors are too expensive and not really ready for gamng yet but again why do I need 4K on screen where 1080p is just enough.
 

Larry Litmanen

Reputable
Jan 22, 2015
616
0
5,010
17
I am still gaming on 1080p which I found more than enough. 4K monitors are too expensive and not really ready for gamng yet but again why do I need 4K on screen where 1080p is just enough.
My college professor once said, if you feed a man a burger his entire life he will be perfectly happy, but if you give him fillet mignon he will never go back to regular burger meat.
 

gggplaya

Distinguished
Jan 27, 2011
1,248
111
19,490
19
I am still gaming on 1080p which I found more than enough. 4K monitors are too expensive and not really ready for gamng yet but again why do I need 4K on screen where 1080p is just enough.
4k is not needed unless the actual textures are higher than 1080p density. Otherwise, all you'll get are scaled up textures with less aliasing. It'll look a little cleaner in that respect, but not "better" enough to kill your fps performance and spend big bucks on a monitor.
 

2Be_or_Not2Be

Distinguished
Aug 23, 2013
887
21
19,365
115
I am still gaming on 1080p which I found more than enough. 4K monitors are too expensive and not really ready for gamng yet but again why do I need 4K on screen where 1080p is just enough.
My college professor once said, if you feed a man a burger his entire life he will be perfectly happy, but if you give him fillet mignon he will never go back to regular burger meat.
Sure he will, when he only has $5 to spend. Your professor might have caviar tastes, but sometimes you only have a beer budget.
 

cats_Paw

Distinguished
I am gaming on 1080p and will most likely stay there for quite a while.
This is because Plasma color fidelity is too good compared to LEDs (OLEDs are not yet reliable) to use LEDs, even if 4k vs 1080p.

That being said, its hard to even get a plasma nowdays so im guessing the push will be for 4K.

This is AMAZINGLY good for me. While ppl will have to buy the most expensive GPUs to play 4k ULTRA details Ill be buying budget GPUs and still playing on ULTRA.

It took years to go from 720p to 1080p as a standard (TV still did not catch up, but thats nothing surprising as public administrations always stay behind decades of the mainstream).

Looks good so far to me, but untill AMD and nVidia come up with something incredible (VR maybe?) Im not jumping of the hype train.
 

mosc

Reputable
Oct 20, 2014
25
0
4,530
0
4k is 4x 1080P which requires no interpolation. 4K displays work great as general purpose high res desktops and game with zero interpolation at 1080P.
 
It's just a struggle to bring everything up to speed for 4K@60 4:4:4 with HDCP 2.2 support.

Keep pounding the good work THG in trying to educate folks. There will still be many angry, confused campers but they'll simply have to get over it.

Read and understand the specs!

 

2Be_or_Not2Be

Distinguished
Aug 23, 2013
887
21
19,365
115
red77star: "I am still gaming on 1080p which I found more than enough. 4K monitors are too expensive and not really ready for gamng yet but again why do I need 4K on screen where 1080p is just enough. "



I think you might agree with red77star's comment if we include the following context: at this *current* point in time, with today's cost of 4K monitors & the cost of GPU power to run at 4k res w/60fps, he's fine with 1080p.

I would agree. When 4k gaming (monitor + GPU) sell at a much lower price point and games themselves commonly have detailed 4k graphics (not just low-detail rendered at 4k), then you will have the incentive to go 4k over 1080p.
 

chicofehr

Distinguished
Jan 29, 2012
533
0
18,990
2
I'm still waiting to run at 7680x1600 with single card as most games completely suck at cross/sli. I wont be getting 4k for another 5 years as its hard to upgrade from what I have considering I can't run any games at that resolution without going below 10FPS.
 

Kurz

Distinguished
Jun 9, 2006
748
0
19,160
84
I am gaming on 1080p and will most likely stay there for quite a while.
This is because Plasma color fidelity is too good compared to LEDs (OLEDs are not yet reliable) to use LEDs, even if 4k vs 1080p.
Plasma only benefit is the deeper blacks over LED screens. IPS (There are two main tech LED screens TN and IPS) monitors can now hit 144HZ.

IPS panels have better colors than plasma or TN panels.
OLED of course better, but its still an emerging tech.
 

falchard

Distinguished
Jun 13, 2008
2,360
0
19,790
4
4K has tanked in price recently, so why not? At 8K we will be at a pixel density close to what the eyes can discern at 2 Ft away from a standard desktop display.
Still cards have a way to go until they can support 8K considering it's 4 times the necessary power as 4K.
 

milk_inc

Distinguished
Aug 19, 2008
65
0
18,660
10
Well this only said, buy a new monitor not, wait until something become standard, they will make change every year until then they will stuck, gsync or free sync, tn or ips, 144hz or 100hz, curve or not curve, 21:9 or something else, 4k or not, too many things, the best is too not swap montior right now.
 
Plasma only benefit is the deeper blacks over LED screens. IPS (There are two main tech LED screens TN and IPS) monitors can now hit 144HZ.

IPS panels have better colors than plasma or TN panels.
OLED of course better, but its still an emerging tech...
No. Thank you.

I'm with Mr. Paw. Gaming on a big 1080p Plasma TV is sweet. 2160p is nice but not ready for prime-time in gaming. IPS panels ain't all that ---- they're great for color reproduction when properly calibrated but no one gives a crapola about that when gaming.

And --- they don't come in 60-inch models :D

 

toddybody

Distinguished
Dec 13, 2010
1,201
1
19,960
240
I am still gaming on 1080p which I found more than enough. 4K monitors are too expensive and not really ready for gamng yet but again why do I need 4K on screen where 1080p is just enough.
Nothing wrong with 1080p, but you seriously can't diminish 4K's fidelity by comparison. I just sold my Acer 4K G-Sync for the new Dell 1440p 144hz G-sync because I wanted to experience 120hz gaming on something higher than 1080p.

Once manufacturers are making 4K panels at 120hz (DP 1.3) I'll return to 4K happily. The myth that "4K isnt ready" is bogus, I maintained 60fps+ on a single OC 980ti...all at native resolution with a mix of High/Ultra settings (Witcher 3, GTA V, Metro LL...etc) .

If you think "maxing" out a game (i.e., HBAO+SSAOxBAJILLION) is a requirement for a GPUs success, than I'd re-evaluate expectations. There are many titles that can't be maxed out on 1080p and maintain native hz 100% of the time.
 

Schepkens Hendrik

Reputable
Jun 19, 2015
18
0
4,510
0
the sweetspot for gaming is stil WQHD or 1440p/16:9

but im guessing people who use their PC for show like the 27" imac users do who can boast 5k dont realy ever use it for that resolution
 

erendofe

Distinguished
Apr 3, 2009
34
0
18,540
1
some of this is what people convince themselves. I actually game on a 37" 1080i, most of the time I really don't notice the difference between it and the 1080p in the living room unless I actually take notice. As in yes of course there is a difference, but it isn't horrible invasive. although yes 4k is higher res are you really going to benefit with older content, or are you just thinking the older content looks better? I play mmo's that are 10 years old, and moving to 1080 didn't improve the games textures at all. (not that they are utterly horrible ) It can be difficult sometimes to separate hype from real world grit, especially when a person has already predetermined the result in their mind. So, though all this tech stuff is really neat and all, it really boils down to what you are doing with it. like really who needs an r9-380 if they only surf the internet?
 

Eggz

Honorable
Sep 3, 2013
2,044
0
12,460
253
This is a little vague. So HDR will be part of AMD's and Nvidia's next chips, but the real question is whether it will be limited to "pro" versions like Quadro or FirePro, or whether it will be standard for all cards - as it should be.

Enabling something that's built into the chip should be the reason for a 10x price increase. That pricing model isn't cool. Others besides institutions want more functionality as well.
 

cangelini

Contributing Editor
Editor
Jul 4, 2008
1,878
9
19,795
4
This is a little vague. So HDR will be part of AMD's and Nvidia's next chips, but the real question is whether it will be limited to "pro" versions like Quadro or FirePro, or whether it will be standard for all cards - as it should be.

Enabling something that's built into the chip should be the reason for a 10x price increase. That pricing model isn't cool. Others besides institutions want more functionality as well.
AMD is saying 2016 Radeons will have all of this HDR functionality and existing R9 300s will have some.
 

kittle

Distinguished
Dec 8, 2005
898
0
19,160
75
I'm with Mr. Paw. Gaming on a big 1080p Plasma TV is sweet. 2160p is nice but not ready for prime-time in gaming. IPS panels ain't all that ---- they're great for color reproduction when properly calibrated but no one gives a crapola about that when gaming.
You should try having accurate color while gaming. I run a 27" NEC pro monitor. and my games look great. its almost painful to try and watch others play.

on the other hand, if you cant tell the difference - then keep what you have and save your $$$
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS