Best 4K graphics card?

[CAaronD]

Anybody know a good 4K graphics card/cards that can run games such as Crysis 3, Battlefield 4 and so on with 4K and max settings and 40+ FPS? I'm not actually going to buy one so my budget is 2,000.

 

[powelie]

I sit 3 feet from a 50" 4k running at 30fps because I need hdmi 2.0 enough said I will pay nvidia or amd any amount of money I want hdmi 2.0 right now no questions or excuses screw dp I don't care

 

[HowFarToAsgaard]

I sit 3 feet from a 50" 4k running at 30fps because I need hdmi 2.0 enough said I will pay nvidia or amd any amount of money I want hdmi 2.0 right now no questions or excuses screw dp I don't care

How amazing is 4K at 50" I was amazed at how good watch dogs looks at 4K and makes anything smaller looking like a baby's toy. The picture quality out ways the fact that im stuck on 30hz. I don't even bother using 1080p 60hz anymore its just so crap at 50". I did at first but Iv gotten use to 30hz now and its not a issue to me considering the amount of quality im getting. Its almost like im gaming on a 4K console if that makes sense? So when HDMI 2.0 comes out its going to be another world changer.
Its really annoying to hear anyone say anything about 4K when not even owning a 4K unit them selves. They have no idea what there talking about and just go off what they read.
Here is my verdict
GTX770 4GB is the lowest card you want to go with when gaming at 4K. This card will get you over 30fps no problem in newer games. But the brilliant thing about 4K is that it revitalises older games such as dead space and mass effect.
I agree there is not much difference when under 30" but 40" or more ITS A MUST!
I Also don't understand why people spend thousands on there GPU's and then go buy a average display?

 

[David Harrison]

Okay before you even start PLANNING to go 4k, let me tell you a little story about how the normal human eye can't see the difference at normal viewing distance anyway. Actually better yet, read the article yourself

http://carltonbale.com/does-4k-resolution-matter/

Just check the graph/chart in that article and calculate which size screen at which distance you have to be at to make use of 4K

Sorry

Okay before you even start PLANNING to go 4k, let me tell you a little story about how the normal human eye can't see the difference at normal viewing distance anyway. Actually better yet, read the article yourself

http://carltonbale.com/does-4k-resolution-matter/

Just check the graph/chart in that article and calculate which size screen at which distance you have to be at to make use of 4K

Sorry

For people like my self who game on 40" + screens, 4k is the holy grail. A 3840x2160 resolution might not be much of a difference on a 17" screen but for 40" or more there is a huge diferancne. You would be blind not to know the diferance

 

[David Harrison]

I agree 4k gaming on the Samsung 6900 looks surreal! Just need to get the best 4k card now. Can't go back now I've seen the spider! My Evga gtx 780 sc acx can't hack 4k , so going to try gtx 690 SLI or HD7990 crossfire. Happy gaming!

 

[Gaidax]

Current generation of GPUs is insufficient for real 4K gaming, unless you Crossfire.

780Ti is useless for 4k as well, since it's crippled by it's small 3GB RAM, Crossfired R290X is better there since at least you have reasonable amount of VRAM, but really, you'd better just wait for the next generation of cards for 4k.

Or of course you can buy Titan Z or something, if you have the money.

 

[jman1968]

Okay before you even start PLANNING to go 4k, let me tell you a little story about how the normal human eye can't see the difference at normal viewing distance anyway. Actually better yet, read the article yourself

http://carltonbale.com/does-4k-resolution-matter/

Just check the graph/chart in that article and calculate which size screen at which distance you have to be at to make use of 4K

Sorry

Okay before you even start PLANNING to go 4k, let me tell you a little story about how the normal human eye can't see the difference at normal viewing distance anyway. Actually better yet, read the article yourself

http://carltonbale.com/does-4k-resolution-matter/

Just check the graph/chart in that article and calculate which size screen at which distance you have to be at to make use of 4K

Sorry

For people like my self who game on 40" + screens, 4k is the holy grail. A 3840x2160 resolution might not be much of a difference on a 17" screen but for 40" or more there is a huge diferancne. You would be blind not to know the diferance

You are missing the point, you have to be insanely close to the screen to notice 4K - and most people just don't do that.

For example your 40 inch screen, you have to be freakin 2,5 feet(0,6m) from the screen to grasp the full potential of 4K. WHO THE HELL IS 2.5 feet from a 40 INCH !?

Nobody, but PC gamers sit much closer to their monitors so it is perfect for PC gaming. The difference is noticeable as I am looking at a 28" UHD monitor now. As for the thread, check out benchmarks for r9 290's in crossfire. For around $800 you can game at 4K with the settings pretty much maxed out.

 

[David Harrison]

Okay before you even start PLANNING to go 4k, let me tell you a little story about how the normal human eye can't see the difference at normal viewing distance anyway. Actually better yet, read the article yourself

http://carltonbale.com/does-4k-resolution-matter/

Just check the graph/chart in that article and calculate which size screen at which distance you have to be at to make use of 4K

Sorry

Okay before you even start PLANNING to go 4k, let me tell you a little story about how the normal human eye can't see the difference at normal viewing distance anyway. Actually better yet, read the article yourself

http://carltonbale.com/does-4k-resolution-matter/

Just check the graph/chart in that article and calculate which size screen at which distance you have to be at to make use of 4K

Sorry

For people like my self who game on 40" + screens, 4k is the holy grail. A 3840x2160 resolution might not be much of a difference on a 17" screen but for 40" or more there is a huge diferancne. You would be blind not to know the diferance

You are missing the point, you have to be insanely close to the screen to notice 4K - and most people just don't do that.

For example your 40 inch screen, you have to be freakin 2,5 feet(0,6m) from the screen to grasp the full potential of 4K. WHO THE HELL IS 2.5 feet from a 40 INCH !?

Nobody, but PC gamers sit much closer to their monitors so it is perfect for PC gaming. The difference is noticeable as I am looking at a 28" UHD monitor now. As for the thread, check out benchmarks for r9 290's in crossfire. For around $800 you can game at 4K with the settings pretty much maxed out.

 

[David Harrison]

I sit 18inches from my 40" 4k TV and its absolutely brillant. Made a comparison with my 24" 1080p monitor 120hz and its horrible!
Will never buy a monitor again!

 

[David Harrison]

Okay before you even start PLANNING to go 4k, let me tell you a little story about how the normal human eye can't see the difference at normal viewing distance anyway. Actually better yet, read the article yourself

http://carltonbale.com/does-4k-resolution-matter/

Just check the graph/chart in that article and calculate which size screen at which distance you have to be at to make use of 4K

Sorry

 

[David Harrison]

I guess you have never seen a 4k display because FSX at 4k is a as real as it gets , for example London City Extreme at 4k looks like you are in a real airport , 1080p is ok but not a patch on 4k . Get a 4k screen and you will be amazed! I think people said similar things about HD TV but who would want to go back now to 720p?

 

[David Harrison]

780 Ti or R9 290X. Recommend Crossfire/SLI for 4K.

+1

u need crossfire or sli
too costly isnt it 😛

 

[David Harrison]

You can get a r9 290x off ebay for £250, so £500 for 4k gamings not bad as monitors cost around £500 anyway? I can confirm that you have to go crossfire or sli for 4k so this has to be taken into account before getting a 4k screen.

 

[ZeusGamer]

I'd say just get the R9 295x2 haha. That 8GB of frame buffer will do good for you. But some might say otherwise.

 

[Karadjgne]

I read a post here a couple weeks ago. Dude is running xfire 295x2's on a 4k monitor. Of course he has a $5k pc, a 2011 maxed out with full wc. His only problem was trying to get the 2 cards to play nice with each other. For some odd reason the xfire wouldnt work but either single card would. He said the 4k was amazing but was looking at 30ish fps on bf4.

 

[David Harrison]

The R9 295 x 2 would be a great 4k card(s) especially in quad crossfire! So by the way would 4 x HD7990 , especially as the bitcoin boys are now offloading them on ebay for some reason. But what I don't understand is why Nvidia charge so much for dual GPU cards . Why is the Titan Z over £2000, when 2x titans are about £1400? Most other markets if you buy two together its cheaper. Wonder if thats why they made over a billion $ last financial year???

If you can wait 3 or 4 months R9 295 x 2 should come down to £699 like the HD 7990 did . Lol

 

[David Harrison]

You will need a 3dMark 11 score of at least 20000 to get 50+ fps at 4K.

Follow this link :http://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/amd_radeon_r9_295x2_review,17.html

 

[ZeusGamer]

So... get the AMD R9 295x2 then. It'll be the best for your 4K needs haha.

 

[CAaronD]

Dual Hd 7990's wouldn't be very great, because of the frame dips, major heat, noise, etc. If the HD 7990 was still at <$500 it would be probably the best value 4K GPU 😛 But now that the price has shot up to $1,000 it just isn't worth it. Probably the best value for your money now is Dual R9 290's. They would only cost $700 and they would be able to run BF4 at max settings 4K with 40 frames on average.

 

[nikoli707]

4k only needs fxaa or smaa... hardware aa is pointless unless you are taking frame still photos, or you are already getting far more than 60/120/144fps, or whatever fps matches the refresh rate your monitor is set to. by not using hardware antialiasing, vram usage is reduced dramatically. crysis 3 maxed out with fxaa at 4k is only using a tad over 2gb.... this 6/8gb stuff is overkill. their going to have to invent some new processes or whatever to use the vram in these cards if we all switch to 4k.

 

[David Harrison]

Dual Hd 7990's wouldn't be very great, because of the frame dips, major heat, noise, etc. If the HD 7990 was still at <$500 it would be probably the best value 4K GPU 😛 But now that the price has shot up to $1,000 it just isn't worth it. Probably the best value for your money now is Dual R9 290's. They would only cost $700 and they would be able to run BF4 at max settings 4K with 40 frames on average.

 

[David Harrison]

Dual HD 7990's mine running around 70c on benchmarks , no more noise than gtx 780 , total cost for dual set up £580 , about the same cost as one gtx titan but 3Dmark 11 of 23k instead of 14K, so best bang for buck at the moment. Dual R290s cost around £400 but 3Dmark 11 16K. Happy days.

 

[CAaronD]

Dual HD 7990's mine running around 70c on benchmarks , no more noise than gtx 780 , total cost for dual set up £580 , about the same cost as one gtx titan but 3Dmark 11 of 23k instead of 14K, so best bang for buck at the moment. Dual R290s cost around £400 but 3Dmark 11 16K. Happy days.

I was talking about the old price. Now it's almost impossible to find a HD 7990 that hasn't been used for more than 9 months, or hasn't been used for heavy mining for less than $600 ... The HD 7990''s already cost $1,000. It just isn't worth it at $1,000.

 

[ZeusGamer]

Let me ask you guys one thing. What are the benefits of playing at 4K? Other than the fact that you don't need to put any AA?

 

[David Harrison]

Dual HD 7990's mine running around 70c on benchmarks , no more noise than gtx 780 , total cost for dual set up £580 , about the same cost as one gtx titan but 3Dmark 11 of 23k instead of 14K, so best bang for buck at the moment. Dual R290s cost around £400 but 3Dmark 11 16K. Happy days.

I was talking about the old price. Now it's almost impossible to find a HD 7990 that hasn't been used for more than 9 months, or hasn't been used for heavy mining for less than $600 ... The HD 7990''s already cost $1,000. It just isn't worth it at $1,000.

 

[David Harrison]

I am hoping that the gtx 880 SLI will give me 20k 3DMark 11 and hoping it will be under £700 but will have to see. Got a gigabyte R9 290x and 290 crossfire setup giving me 18430 3Dmark 11, cost £425, so not bad but cant use my nvidia 3d with it , also wont do 4k on Samsung 6900.Lol