Could my pc cope with 4k?

[jamesm9598]

So my current pc build is:

• 
  i5 6600
  GTX 1060
  8GB RAM

Would this be able to handle 4k or would I need to make some upgrades if so what should I upgrade?

 

[Mike3k24]

I'd say no, once you get up to 4K you're pretty much all GPU bound. I'd suggest a 1080 or 1080ti

 

[hdmark]

If youre playing games like Dota, League, CSGO you'll be fine. if youre playing more graphically intense games then no, you'll need a much better gpu to see decent framerates at good settings

 

[JamesSneed]

The 1060 does very poorly at 4K think sub 30 FPS on any new game but older titles could be fine. I would advise against going 4K unless you upgrade your GPU to a 1080 or better. If you are in no hurry you could wait to see how AMD's Vega looks before jumping into 4K.

 

[JackNaylorPE]

If you define "cope" as 60 fps, no PC with a single GFX card can cope with 4k. Two things will make 4k "ready for prime time":

1. The arrival of the new AU Optronics screens (New models arriving soon from Asus and Acer) which are capable of 144 Hz
2. Video cards that can do deliver 60+ fps in a majority of today's games

Using the 22 games in Techpowerup's game test suite @ 4k, the 1080 Ti with the best numbers

18% of games deliver 45 fps or less
36% of games deliver 60 fps or less
50% of games deliver 67 fps or less
86% of games deliver 76 fps or less

The recommended switchover point from G-Sync to ULMB is about 75 fps.

As for the 1080, it's a great 1080p card, I wouldn't use even @ 1440p.

If you really, really want 4k ... today, I would urge you to at least wait for the new AU Optonics screens. Investing in the older technology today will leave you in a position whereby selling your old screen to get the upcoming technology, will be a tough sale as the value of the current tech will drop precipitously.

To power it, again with currently available GFX cards, and with the anticipation of living with it for 3 years or more, we'd recommend twin 1080 Ti's. Since they have no competition from AMD, nVidia is not exactly putting a lot of effort into SLI since the only result of improved SLI performance is less sales of their hi end cards. But perhaps that will improve once AMD has an entry in this performance niche.

 

[hdmark]

If you define "cope" as 60 fps, no PC with a single GFX card can cope with 4k. Two things will make 4k "ready for prime time":

1. The arrival of the new AU Optronics screens (New models arriving soon from Asus and Acer) which are capable of 144 Hz
2. Video cards that can do deliver 60+ fps in a majority of today's games

Using the 22 games in Techpowerup's game test suite @ 4k, the 1080 Ti with the best numbers

18% of games deliver 45 fps or less
36% of games deliver 60 fps or less
50% of games deliver 67 fps or less
86% of games deliver 76 fps or less

The recommended switchover point from G-Sync to ULMB is about 75 fps.

As for the 1080, it's a great 1080p card, I wouldn't use even @ 1440p.

If you really, really want 4k ... today, I would urge you to at least wait for the new AU Optonics screens. Investing in the older technology today will leave you in a position whereby selling your old screen to get the upcoming technology, will be a tough sale as the value of the current tech will drop precipitously.

To power it, again with currently available GFX cards, and with the anticipation of living with it for 3 years or more, we'd recommend twin 1080 Ti's. Since they have no competition from AMD, nVidia is not exactly putting a lot of effort into SLI since the only result of improved SLI performance is less sales of their hi end cards. But perhaps that will improve once AMD has an entry in this performance niche.

Those are assumptions with high-ultra settings though right?

Im thoroughly enjoying playing on my 1440p monitor using a 970 . Im not maxing all of the games i play but they still look amazing and better than they would at 1080 with the settings slightly higher.

I think the biggest factor is what games hes playing and if he minds dropping off the extra features with hair/light

 

[JackNaylorPE]

In a sense, a lot of sites test @ 1080p and 1440p with AA and AF, but at 4k they are oft deemed to offer no image quality improvements and therefore are not applied.

And as indicated, it depends on what technology is being put in use. Most will tell you that once you play at 144 / 165 Hz, there's no going back to 60 Hz. If it comes between 1080p @ 144 Hz and 1440p at 60 Hz, I'll stay at 1080p w/o giving it a moment's thought. Right now the best user experience to my eyes is 1440p @ 165 Hz (120 Hz using ULMB) on an AU Optronics IPS Screen from Asus or Acer , TPU tested all 3 MSI Gaming X cards so will use this as a comparison

1080p => MSI Gaming X 1060 delivers 59.6 fps in Witcher 3
1440p => MSI Gaming X 1070 delivers 64.2 fps in Witcher 3
2160p => MSI Gaming X 1080 delivers 46.8 fps (doesn't quite cut it) in Witcher 3
2160p => MSI Gaming X 1080 Ti delivers 65.0 fps in Witcher 3

Now while W3 was considered a pretty demanding game when released, it has kinda paled next to today's titled, now its in 10th place in that respect among the 22 games in the test suite. Our suggestions for 4k are:

a) Do not invest in current technology, wait for 144 Hz AU Optronics IPS screens to arrive
b) Once that tech arrives, it will be expensive, wait a year for the next big thing and the prices on the above drops to reasonable levels.
c) Have a 3440 x 1440 curved screen here atm ... not impressed.