Dell UltraSharp 32: a 32-inch Ultra HD display set to arrive in Q4

Yah, very important to clarify that I was talking about gaming and not other applications, it definitely does have immediate advantages, such as much more screen real estate etc.

Cheers

 

Well, unless someone's delusional or doing blind reading, no one could had thought otherwise.

Some Key words were: gaming, Titans, SLI's, eye candy, acceptable FPS, companies like Relic, 4K gaming and last but not least, gamers.

lol! jk btw.

 

Hehe

 

4k is an easy task even for series 5000 amd's and nvidia's 400, correct me if im wrong but those cards can handle 3-6 monitors at 1600p each, doesnt make sense to be all freaky about this "4k" marketing bs imho, and considering how even a phone can handle 1080p games now and tablets doing 1600p im wondering where are the 8k monitors that are going to set the high end desktop territory leaving 4k for the mainstream, like 1600p did leaving the mainstream with 1080p

 

Have to agree mostly. I ran my 1600p display with a single 5870 for years, in the most demanding games I'd just turn down the advanced settings a bit. AA is punishing, but personally at these high resolutions I don't find AA vastly important.

The main advantage of these monitors is desktop real estate anyway.

 

Errr well no, it took 4 Titans to get several of the newer games running at 4K at Vhigh settings (barely maintaining 60FPS - this was an Anandtech test on another 4K monitor, it was linked on G3D in another thread) and people who buy kit like that aren't people who are going to want to be having to turn the detail down.

It's just not realistic to think a 5870 or a 4xx Nvidia card is going to drive newer games at Vhigh detail settings on a 4K monitor (from a VRAM perspective alone, they just won't cut it). Those cards won't even drive a ZR30W effectively at vhigh settings in newer games (and even some older ones).

I agree, you can probably game on a 4K monitor with those cards if you are willing to sacrifice a lot of eye candy but as I have enough trouble getting a constant 60FPS in certain games at 1600P, I'd have to strongly disagree with you and ESPHack when it comes to enthusiast level gaming (vhigh settings, AA etc).

Unless you are playing Rebel Assault of course (Hyperbole, but you know what I mean).

I do agree on the real estate angle which is why I will probably get one at some point but I'd like to see some more options first (especially HP's offering).

 

my HDTV when I use with my PC 7+ feet away it which is the same distance i play my consoles from. like I said never everone wants 32" 2 feet in front of them.

It will it may LOOK but better there isnt a SINGLE card on the mark that will handle the resolution and keep stable FPS in new games with going SLI with 2+ cards. That res is nice BUT only if there are cards that can handle it cause no entry level to mid range card will handle that res in game unless it some really old game.

 

But you do realize these monitors aren't JUST for people who play pc games right?

Being a photographer, I cannot fathom how much I want 4K monitors to be pushed as hard as possible so the prices come down a bit.
Working on a 4K monitor would be beyong glorious for my workflow and editing.

 

People who buy this just to game either have too much money and run multi GPU setups anyway, or are buying it for things other than gaming. I didn't buy my 1600p screen solely for gaming.

I never said a 5870 is going to run 4k, that card is like 4 years old. I said I USED to run a 1600p screen with a 5870. Swap 5870 for a modern high end card and 1600p for modern high end resolution. You get a similar situation.

Indeed.

Exactly what I said, you can game on these screens with a single GPU setup by just tweaking settings no AA etc. End of the day it's what the user is happy with, I personally see no difference using AA at 1600p anyway never mind 4k.

This is the reason most early adopters would get one I'd imagine.