12K gaming rig renders 1.5 billion pixels per second for just $17,000

Well one thing I learned is a 750W PSU won't run 3x 7970's. lol

 

Anyone who believes we will benefit from 4K should read this;

Does 4K Resolution Matter?

 

:stewpid:

 

Thanks for the link, Phil. That ends a lot of discussion. No 4K wishes anymore for gaming.

 

No, not just TV, but PC users too. Look at steam surveys, and many others on the web. Most are still under 1080p.

 

Honestly you have the TV/media industry to blame for slow adoption rates.
TV pushes standards faster than people think, and HDTV is still too expensive for a lot of people. Until Greed leaves the minds of those behind the media, we won't have a new standard. So it's not the minds behind the monitors, but the minds behind the media trying to bank in on HD instead of spread the love.

The minds behind the screens have to adjust to them, and thus inflate the price of their screens to adjust to the minority that could benefit from it.

You are right though, it is a VERY SAD thing.

EDIT--

Oops....sorry for double post, I thought I hit edit on my first reply.

 

No problem.

 

What the hell do TVs have to do with wanting a 4K monitor for the pc? Nobody sits 10 Feet from their monitor.

 

That was my thoughts after reading it.

According to that graph, 32" 4k is good at ~2-3ft veiwing distance. Which is pretty much the distance you would be from your monitor sitting at a desk. I'm also pretty skeptical of the method used to form the graph anyway.

 

I think that chart is a load of ****, I can certainly see a lot better than that. It says you'd have to be roughly within 2.6 feet to see the full benefit of 1080p on a small 20-something inch monitor. I can see the freakin' pixels further than that if I look for them. I have better than 20/20 vision but it can't be that much better than the average person.

 

You guys are absolutely right actually, whoops. That's a wrong on my part. I had my PPI numbers mixed up.

However my original point still stands that aliasing IS an issue.

 

Correct me if i'm wrong...4k resolution is essentially double that of 1080p (in vertical and horizontal), and therefore, a 24" 4K monitor, in essence, would, for anti-aliasing purposes, act as a 2xAA of a 1080p screen equivalent?

Not sure if that made any sense, simply, would a 4K resolution monitor when dealing with anti-aliasing look like a 1080p monitor with 2xAA enabled?

I, like others, am going to call bogus on this one

I work in retail, with a wall full of tvs, and i am pretty far away from them

We rarely get a 1080p 32" tv, and i can tell you, when they come in, i can tell the difference, definitely, 15 or so feet away, specifically when dealing with text, but otherwise aswell (though i have found that most people getting this size of tv don't care about it, that's not the point, that would usually have to do with the fact that they don't want to pay extra cost, when they are getting a 32" tv, which they are likely getting due to budget reasons anyways)

Also, the 70" tv that we have at 1080p from the same 15 feet away...i can see the pixels...., very easily, which according to that chart, shouldn't be possible

 

Erm, its a 3x1 setup, not 3 x 3, so you only divide the 11520 by 3. Which is 3840 x 2160....

EDIT: too late...

 

What most people think gaming looks when they hear this 3 words together: 3D SURROUND GAMING!



How truly is IRL:


How it SHOULD be IRL:


Example 2:



for entertaining purposes only.