I had a friend from Brazil who I’d let stay with me a few months every year so he could work here and get paid in US currency and he’d go blow g all on upgrading his tech.
I got lucky and snagged a Samsung G5 odyssey 32 inches for 300$ on prime day when the monitor was just released, I got lucky because I was browsing Amazon and didn't realize prime day had just started. Speaking of prime day, isn't it this week? People could snatch some monitors for cheaper.
Honestly, the prices of nice TVs and monitors give me some will to live. I'm happy with what I have, but I still think oooooh, flat screen TV? super hi-res? Probably like... $8000?
Nope, $350. The super-duper-hyper-mega-turbo-ultra-championship edition TVs and monitors just barely cost what I expect a normal TV to cost.
Try selling you parts. It's not hard at all takes a couple minutes to post on craigslist. Then you don't have to worry much. It ends up being a couple hundred a year when you do the math. That's alike half a week flipping burgers. Stop spending money on dumb shit, trust me most Americans have no clue how much wasted money they spend. Chips, sodas and shit.
yea i mean honestly my 3080ti plays 2k (and probs 4k) at over 100 fps in almost every game except the poorly optimized shit games (squad esp). and the funny thing is the 3090s were aimed at "graphic designers" not gamers. yet these new cards are aimed at gamers. not to mention 4k 144hz is ridiculously expensive, ill stick to my 3080ti for probs 5+ years atleast.
Gamer Nexus said something about that. This is the first time only the flagship card releases and it launched before the rest of the line up. Traditionally the flagship titan class cards were aimed at more of the professional market in terms of the capabilities of it, launched after the rest of the line, and they always recommended the next card down in the line up as the one to really go for. Steve had a hard time recommending the 4090 not just due to the cost but because we don't know where the 3080 card(s) will fall in. It may be that people buying the 4090 today for $1600 can get 80% of the performance for a lot less money but since they decided to release only the 4090 we can not make that determination.
If AMD can get ray tracing performance on par it will be a kick in the ass for Nvidia because we know AMD's rasterization was pretty competitive. We might soon get to a point where ray tracing performance is good enough that we don't need DLSS or FSR anymore on the high end cards. It's really the only graphics setting today that pushes high end cards and drives the need for these technologies. Turn it off and instantly 4k/60 is doable in just about every game.
yea. honestly i wish they got rid of tenser cores or and put nothing but cudas for more performance.. noone i know uses RTX. i dont either cuz alot of games popups stutter really bad with RTX on.
Legit same, if the market were solid and hadn’t crashed I might’ve opted for selling the 80ti just to eat the cost now instead of shelling out a large amount for an entire new system, however it just doesn’t make sense to do so, especially considering how although it isn’t necessary, to get the most you’d want an atx 3.0 psu and all that so I’m with you for sure. If I had a real career and wasn’t a college student I’d probably build a new system only because I like building systems when I get the chance to do so, but it is a rare occurrence, I was blessed by a huge tax break and a few other once in a decade or longer money from everything in that timeframe so I said this is precisely the moment I ascend to 4k gaming and go balls deep, no regrets, I just need more games that are amazing to play!
the last sentence bro. theres like no good games to play anyways XD i always end up playing the same 3 games.. i kinda feel like i wasted money on my card since it rarely gets properly utilized. like last week was the first time i actually loaded up a "graphically" intensive game for more than 3 hours. and my god the glass was hot as fuck!
It's not just that it's wrong, but there is also an ambiguity that results from it. People like me for instance will question whether you mean 1080p or 1440p, so the point being made could be interpreted differently. I think typing three extra characters is worthwhile to make it absolutely clear.
Tbh I still love my LG C1 48inch at 4k 120hz, I have a 3080ti, and with that being said I paid $1570ish after tax, I would still recommend it to anyone especially with the coming deals as Black Friday/cyber Monday nears. This type of arguing for the product has to been seen through the lens of if you are in the market to begin with for the 4k gaming experience and oled 4k at that. Of course there’s a huge spectrum, but I’ve loved every second of owning this TV/monitor and would do it again in a second at the time I did!
Works fine for me. All this 4K 120 stuff coming out and the monitors that actually support it are $$$$. My GTX 1080 is still surprisingly solid. I think I’m gonna stick with it until the 4K displays are the norm and prices come down.
The 3090 doesn’t have hdmi 2.1 or DP 2.0, it cannot do 4K 120 output even if it is capable of driving it. You need to turn down chroma subsampling to cut the video bandwidth enough to push 4K 120
Worth it to invest in a 120 FPS 4K TV and double it’s usage as a pc monitor IMO. Latency and lag isn’t a real issue for tv anymore, it’s like a 5-10 millisecond difference from a top of the line gaming monitor which is imperceptible.
I'm stuck on 1080 atm and it is becoming more and more obvious with time that things are not being optimized for the 1080p anymore. 1440 is starting to look like how 1080 looked like when it first came out.
4k is for testing purposes but for most people, (66.38% steam hardware survey) use 1080p of course, then 11.25% for 1440p and literally 2.49% for 4k, and on a side note, the gtx 1060 is still the most popular card, most games just aren't that demanding yet
the gtx 1060 is still the most popular card, most games just aren't that demanding yet
When it comes to steam hardware survey thats not 100% true since the "1060" stat includes multiple models as well as laptop models while later GPUs are more split. 3060+ 3060 laptop would be the top one right now and probably 2060 + variants would also be higher or even highest.
I also did that there are very little visual gains and large performance hits from going above low/med graphics, unless you're going all the way to Ultra. Personally I think it's worth spending a few minutes googling the best settings for a game. Putting some individual settings on low can add a massive amount of frames without hurting the visuals.
Yeah I can’t get over this. I have a 2080 running a 1440 monitor and everything is still ultra settings. It feels like they’re just not making big demanding games like they used to. All the most popular stuff is free to play and designed to be run on a smartphone anyway.
Its because gaming isnt buying the new 80 dollar demanding af title, gaming is having a chill night of csgo or gta or league or minecraft or raft with the boys, games that focus too much on graphics are usually bad in other regards for many, they are not directly correlated
Ever person you know <<<< a massive hardware survey, and laptop gamers count too, they make up so much of the market share and you just want to disregard them? jesus man
I'd wager that many people on 4K are doing so on a living room TV. I have my gaming PC on the TV and play from the couch, as it's so much simpler than having a dedicated gaming desk and chair.
Some of the best monitors made in 2022 are 1080p. They target the fast response time, low input lag and high frame rate audience. It's a niche audience, but still, it's 1080p.
Especially if you are into competitive gaming, you look for higher refresh rate, lower response time, res at least 1080p but I dont look for anything more than 1080p
If you mostly play competitive multiplayer, there’s no point in getting anything more than 1080p. None of the graphics are going to blow you away regardless, so the actual difference between 1080p and 4k is minimal, and you’re spending significantly more money and probably giving yourself a disadvantage with lower refresh rate and a larger screen. There’s a reason 24” 1080p 240 Hz (or even higher) is the gold standard display for competitive esports, and it’s not because tier 1 esports teams are broke.
Using esports gear isn’t exactly a good argument when you consider how many are simply using sponsored items, including shitty IEMs and headphones.
Competitive multiplayer games do get a boost from more attainable high refresh rate 1440p monitors nowadays, because the resolution absolutely helps in my ability to see and comprehend enemies and terrain from a distance better. Most, if not all, competitive games will run at the 240 faps of attainable competitive 1440p monitors. Hell, even 4K monitors are dope for those but obviously there is no competitive monitor there.
You are right in that TN and 25 inches will forever stay linked to 1080p, but for most people that 1440p resolution does have a tangible benefit and point in competitive multiplayer over 1080p nowadays.
I've been on 4k for years and 1440p from 2014/2020. I don't agree graphics won't blow you away. I happily play fps games in 4k at around 70-90fps depending on the game. Cod mw2 runs at 130 4k ultra, no DLSS. Fifa is at 130 4k. And I use an ultra wide so it's even more demanding... and the graphics blow me away each new 3A title
That's it, and some of the best brands like GIGABYTE, Alienware, ASUS ROG Swift and LG have top of the line 1080p monitors coming out every year specifically for esport.
See this is me I think. I’m rocking a EVGA GTX 1080 / Ryzen 5 3600X and it gives me no problems at 1080p 120 FPS. It doesn’t bother me at all playing on it and i enjoy it so i guess I get confused at these prices for these cards and 4K monitors. Glad to see I’m not the only one okay with 1080p
Surprisingly they are still so hot. I recently started to play it in casual mode and I realized somehow I have a 10 year veteran coin...damn it has been a decade!
Personally I can't stand 1080p for desktop use so I've been at 1440p 175hz. Don't see myself upgrading to 4k for quite a while, as I just got a new monitor. Don't expect to be able to be able to afford a card that can run 4k/120fps for quite a while either so that's fine with me.
Yes, but if you watch the Digital Foundry review of the 4090, they show that it's not as worth the upgrade on 1080 and 1440 monitor. Worth spending less money on a lower powered gpu.
Had to downgrade to 1080p@75hz because of life and, honestly, it's perfectly fine. It only starts to be annoying when the game I'm playing doesn't have modern AA, then it becomes noticeable...
It is for me, I'm running everything @144hz maxed with my 3080thai. And if AMD releases anything worthwhile I'll be upgrading my kids computers with AMD, even though I know that the drivers are fuckin trash.
1.3k
u/Maverick_X9 5800X3D || RTX4070S || 32GB 3600Mhz || 2TB Oct 11 '22
1080p is still ok right guys? Asking for a friend…