Dreaming Out Loud Build

[giltyler]

This is intended for general discussion of future hardware.
What type of build would it take to run 3 4K monitors in surround.That is no small feat. 4096 x 2160
Please be specific on what and why you would chose certain parts.

 

[mouse24]

Thats so far in the future it wouldn't even make a good discussion topic. Even 1920x1080x3 is rough, 1600x3 is mostly undoable on current hardware.

 

[ingtar33]

This is intended for general discussion of future hardware.
What type of build would it take to run 3 4K monitors in surround.That is no small feat. 4096 x 2160
Please be specific on what and why you would chose certain parts.

not possible with today's gpus.

even 3 or 4 titans in SLi wouldn't manage it.

 

[giltyler]

There are some running 2560x1600 three way now.

 

[ingtar33]

There are some running 2560x1600 three way now.

thats but thats like 1/16 the pixals this guy is talking about

 

[mouse24]

There are some running 2560x1600 three way now.

Where did you see this? Maybe with 3 titans in games that scale extremely well with 3 cards. Most games hardly/don't take advantage of a 3rd card. Which you would need assuming 3x1600p monitors.

 

[manofchalk]

Display technology I think is set to accelerate, 4K TV's and content are quickly dropping in price so I think it wont be long before 4K monitors are commonplace.
The question is then, can the GPU's of the future handle it? At the high end of enthusiast gaming, we might finally have to make a decision between resolution and settings :lol:.

 

[ingtar33]

Display technology I think is set to accelerate, 4K TV's and content are quickly dropping in price so I think it wont be long before 4K monitors are commonplace.
The question is then, can the GPU's of the future handle it? At the high end of enthusiast gaming, we might finally have to make a decision between resolution and settings :lol:.

its doubtful this will ever come to home pcs... home theators, yes. but gpus will have to be something silly like 8times more powerful then they are now to use 4k... and the human eye can't see the difference between standard high def and 4k on any screen smaller then 40". i'm telling you right now, you're not gonna play on a 40" computer monitor 3 feet from your face.

so 4k won't be some breakthrough in pc gaming as it's impossible for the human eye to see it in smaller monitors, and it's impossible... probably for the next 4-8 years for gpus to render in it.

 

[mouse24]

Display technology I think is set to accelerate, 4K TV's and content are quickly dropping in price so I think it wont be long before 4K monitors are commonplace.
The question is then, can the GPU's of the future handle it? At the high end of enthusiast gaming, we might finally have to make a decision between resolution and settings :lol:.

its doubtful this will ever come to home pcs... home theators, yes. but gpus will have to be something silly like 8times more powerful then they are now to use 4k... and the human eye can't see the difference between standard high def and 4k on any screen smaller then 40". i'm telling you right now, you're not gonna play on a 40" computer monitor 3 feet from your face.

so 4k won't be some breakthrough in pc gaming as it's impossible for the human eye to see it in smaller monitors, and it's impossible... probably for the next 4-8 years for gpus to render in it.

Do you have any proof for this? I am not saying you are wrong I am just saying I want more info on this subject.

 

[manofchalk]

For what I said, based mainly on a discussion on a livestream I watched.
Skip to 17:05 for the relevant bit, though these live streams are pretty good.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iX9E5i_HzRg

With the human eye not being able to notice 4K resolutions, I doubt it. Its quite easy to see a difference in resolution between 1080p and 1440p on a 27" screen, never mind 4K which is double the resolution of 1440p.

 

[ingtar33]

For what I said, based mainly on a discussion on a livestream I watched.
Skip to 17:05 for the relevant bit, though these live streams are pretty good.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iX9E5i_HzRg

With the human eye not being able to notice 4K resolutions, I doubt it. Its quite easy to see a difference in resolution between 1080p and 1440p on a 27" screen, never mind 4K which is double the resolution of 1440p.

here you go. forgive the title, but the author was pointing out how close/far you have to be and the screen size needed to tell the difference between 1080p and 4k

http://reviews.cnet.com/8301-33199_7-57566079-221/why-ultra-hd-4k-tvs-are-still-stupid/

his conclusion is you'd need to be 5' away on a 50" monitor to see the difference... any closer on any smaller of a screen and you'd never be able to tell the difference.

 

[ingtar33]

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

here is another article quoting the same chart, and asking the same question

just to be fair, here is a contrary point of veiw.

it's a calculator to help determine the size of the monitor you'd need at a certain viewing distance to take advantage of 4k.

http://referencehometheater.com/2013/commentary/4k-calculator/

this calculator conflicts with the above chart, claiming you can get some benefits of 4k on a 28" monitor at a range of 2 feet. of course it's making this claim as the minimum range you might be able to see a difference. not any claims about the range you'd need to be to see the full benifit of 4k, like the other chart, which is why this info and that chart might not be in conflict.