There is absolutely no reason for resolutions higher than 1920x1080px and any monitor bigger than 60 inches is a...

There is absolutely no reason for resolutions higher than 1920x1080px and any monitor bigger than 60 inches is a fucking meme.

Prove me the fuck wrong.

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Display_lag
babeltechreviews.com/gtx-1080-ti-sli-performance-25-games/3/
pastebin.com/jaHkuPy9
pastebin.com/6tzc3ZnT
pastebin.com/tTpmNyLs
boallen.com/fps-compare-html5.html
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

I can't really. I could see MAYBE going up to 1440p, but that's it. 4K is a joke and way too expensive to justify it.

1920 x 1200 is actually pretty cool.

this nigga knows his shit

16:10 is the only good widescreen resolution.

Why?

The human eye can only see in 640x480 30FPs 256 colors anyway.

My monitor is 1680x1050. Weird as hell.

I can't and I won't.

3440x1440 master race here

SUCK MY DICK

Sometimes I feel like 2K and 4K monitors are just memes to get you to buy better hardware. Games aren't a good excuse anymore because they're always held back by consoles because "muh multiplats" so now they need a new reason.

Naw.

doubling 1080p to get few inches of screen space is fucking retarded

I don't understand why everyone fails to realize if you up the resolution you just make it easier to see all the games faults in the graphics.

Nothing becomes a thing until prices are affordable by majority.
Period.
4K and VR is going to take another decade.

This. It's the same shit with porn, watch it at 360p to see two attractive women get at it, or watch in 1080p and realize how disgusting they are.

This is why 640x480 is one true god-tier resolution

I got extra space for a furry banner across the screen to go along with my furry wallpaper and my furry theme.

Just play on a projector with a home cinema, and you'll see.

Not to mention that the more distance for the signal to travel, the higher the display lag
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Display_lag

...

Good taste but it still hurts me how Lexi Belle got fucking fat.

>"Holy shit this is fucking perfect I feel like the one true king of my domain but seriously what the fuck is with that price?"

While it's more expensive than 16:9, it gives you more height for anything from editing pictures to typing documents and programming to gaming without putting bezels in the way.

I don't really care what my side monitors are, but the center monitor is the most important.
For that, I've been using 16:10, 32".

I do think 2k has an advantage for gaming, that is, you won't ever need AA again unless the game is just shittily coded, in the first place.

4k is purely a gimmick designed to take money from suckers.
The amount of GPU power that wastes would be better used in higher FPS (72, 90, 144, etc.).

2x 1440p is productivity master race

Are you fucking retarded? Most devs that actually give a shit will give you the option to scale or adjust your UI so you can enjoy your 56 inch monitor.

I had a 2560x1920 monitor 10 years ago. Similar resolution crts too. Crts were far better for this stuff.

Both your points are countered by photo / video editing as being able to have a single pixel of the original take up multiple pixels of your display makes pixel perfect editing much easier.

As for vidya higher res does a better job of removing aliasing than any anti-aliasing technology.
1440p is the sweet spot right now, 4k is a joke unless you believe people can't see more than 25 fps.

1280x1024 mustard rice

What about a higher ppi in a 60 inch monitor?

What about 3x 1920x1080, but oriented vertically ("letterbox"), not horizontally ("landscape")?

At least games look better without jaggies, bump it to 2x aa and its perfect.

That'll get fixed soon

I like having lots of screen real estate and high res monitors deliver on that. 1440p is the optimal resolution, 1080p is acceptable, anything lower is shit tier.

I rarely if ever play games in full screen, though.

4k is very useful for work. Being able to look at 5 Windows of code and 3 of documentation at the same time on the same screen is incredibly valuable. If I want to play a game on it, I can just half the resolution and play in 1080p and lose nothing, or turn off antialiasing, and play in 4k for about the same performance and better visuals.
You fags keep saying there's no merit to a 4k monitor, but other than base graphics performance, you actually have no argument. Pushing that the actual concept of using a higher resolution is wrong in and of itself is unbelievably retarded.

I use a big-ass HDTV for my computer gamin'… It's way cheaper. I know the contrast ratios on monitors are way better, but I would rather save several hundred dollars.

Fucking sheep, falling for the marketing meme.
I bet you play games made after 2000.

whos the real sheep here

Its all poorfags
Guess when did VR become "hated" even though everyone said it would be a really slow push?
The fucking price point during the Faceberg reveal.

Before that people here would talk about the hardware and uses of the fucking thing.
Now no one is even giving two fucks about it when the goddamn things are starting to get actual support for actual games amd not tech demos and are filled to the brim with porn.

I have a 1600 x 900 monitor. I really see no reason to go any higher. I can play better looking games at native resolution with my shit-tier hardware that I won't have any reason to upgrade until enough games come out to justify it.

shill

No one wants to buy a CRT out of the back of your car, Jim. Stop shilling.

There's no need for more than 300 baud, humans can't read faster than this.

The point is, consumers move forward even when it is not necessary or superfluous and later we figure out how to waste a new technology instead of making a smart use of it. Case in point, WWW.

Yes, because everything humans look at is just text.
Visually we process way more than 300 bauds

you can not be this dense

Your eyesight is shit. Commit suicide. Reported for trolling.

More height than an 1440p 16:9 amirite?

...

They're just sluts user. Of course real dykes are disgusting.

Nah. It becomes difficult to distinguish between 4K and 8K, but for a computer screen you're fairly close to, 8K would be about the limit of what the eye can perceive. The final solution to the monitor question is 8K @ 200Hz plus a very low response time and good colors.

I upgraded my video card and monitor multiple times just to get better performance and visuals in Dolphin, and better screen real-estate for FreeCiv and Dwarf Fortress. I don't play a lot of newer games, but better hardware is pretty great for emulators much of the time. Dolphin at 4K plus anti-aliasing is pretty sweet. The only downside is that it's so fucking sharp that you can really see all the polygons, so the only games that really look amazing are heavily stylized ones like Wind Waker; the others look really good, but being able to see every polygon edge clearly is almost enough to take you out of it.

I really want to try dolphin with VR too. I have no interest at all in VR otherwise, and I've never even seen a VR headset in real life, but the idea of playing Metroid Prime in VR is almost enough to make me cum in my pants. Imagine landing on Tallon IV, looking up and seeing those water droplets on your visor.

Right? That shits already outdated. Who's ready for the glorious 8k Master Race.


The only one who looks to come out a winner in this race, are the ones who didn't participate. Switch confirmed for best console.

And people say we're not living in a cyberpunk dystopia.

Here's my phone.
1920x1080 nigga.
The more I started using this, the more often I started noticing the very small pixels. Especially around the top icons.
I'm not ready to upgrade a desktop though, until we get stable 4K at 100Hz+

At least CRT shaders will now emulate a CRT screen in a near perfect scale when 8K comes out. It will still look like shit without the phosphor color intensity and bleeding and all tho

End yourself

Are you telling me you can notice a pixel in a phone screen? Sure… oh i see you came here to represent Samsung

It's not retarded. it's magical

Sour grapes.

There are rare attractive real dykes. I had an attractive friend who was 100% lesbian and just stopped dating entirely because she was completely unable to find another attractive lesbian in the city. She complained constantly about all the fat dykes who lied about being fat online (60% of America is overweight and 30% is obese, but for some reason Lesbians are way more overweight and obese than the average women in America).
So they exist, you just never see them because there are way fewer of them and most of them would rather be alone than be with the disgusting ones that are everywhere, so most of them just end up looking like attractive girls that are alone.

It's why you see so many normal guys with fat chicks. There are just so few good-looking people to choose from, but dudes are more desperate to get their dicks wet.

Consult eye doctor.

Accurate.

I am going to say that 99% of consumer software other than gaming and coding software (including browsers) is absolutely not optimized for 4k in terms of UI. Not to mention for users who do not need literally 4 1080p monitors glued together, it's an incredible amount of real estate to drag a mouse pointer across and will not feel natural unless your screen is over 32" at least, having used several 4k monitors myself.

The fuck? I make 100k and will refuse to run any software associated with Kikebook, much less hardware.


You can not be this blind to not see that he is clearly that dense.

Dubs confirm. Co-worker brought one in today and it was awesome.

We're almost there.

There's plenty of other VR vendors, but people hate on ALL of VR, even the valvedrones. Clearly it's a case of sour grapes.

Holy shit casuals

I think a lot of that comes from the hardware vendors saying that their products would be walled gardens right off the bat - Facebook-only approved apps and what not on the Oculus.

I think it's going to be really uncomfortable to wear, personally, but I think porn and vidya with it will be pretty great.

The potential for positional audio is also enticing. I think they just hate things because they want to hate, which is great. It's not because they can't afford $200 or whatever when they just bought like 30 steam games and built a new PC last year.

Now we just need a Matrix/Virtual Cyberspace. Granted games aren't bad, but I want sculpted corp systems that I can break in to and steal data and fuck with security cams while dodging IC.

Reading comprehension.

If you have a job and the eyesight for it, more screen real estate is invaluable.

As for vidya and 4K, depends on how far away the screen is.

Right, but my main argument is that 4k is very useful for work (even if you're a student, being able to work on word processing with side-by-side two-page layout is pretty great) with very few downsides (one of the downsides is that almost no websites are built to handle that real-estate, so you end up with massive amounts of blank space in most sites, rather than having them scale up properly and use the space that's available). For games, pixel doubling allows you to simply drop to 1080p at no cost, except the loss of subpixel rendering in the few games that support it (and even those only support it for text). You can't do the pixel doubling at anything between 1080p and 4k, because 4k is the next integer multiple of 1080p (at 3840x2160, up from 1080p's 1920x1080).
I'd agree that 4k is useless if you only want to play video games and are already just using 1080p without antialiasing.


It feels better if you either use an OS built to adapt for the higher DPI, or just by tweaking mouse settings yourself. The biggest thing that 4k does for a screen of the same size is to just give you better definition and sharper, more readable text. I haven't had any UI issues in a long time, as people are finally getting the memo and making their applications work across multiple DPI settings for more OSes than just Mac OS. Mine is a 27" 4K monitor. There are two legitimate issues with 4k, which are that it is more graphically intensive to pump out so many more pixels, and that people don't develop with higher DPI in mind. The latter is getting better, and the former is nearly a non-point if you are already using 4xAA at 1080p, as no antialiasing at 4k usually looks better at nearly the same performance.

I should be more clear. I'm not saying that 4k is better in every way (though it would be if support was as good and websites and applications were developed with high DPI in mind), I'm just saying that it's stupid to claim that it's simply objectively worse to have a higher resolution. There are pros and cons to weigh, and it's not a simple "it's just better" or "it's just worse" discussion. If you use your computer to work with as well as just games, it's probably better in enough ways to warrant it. If you don't, it might be better or it might not be worth the expense.

With you on the 1080 thing unless you have some actual special need for something higher, photo or video editing possibly.
For games 4K and up is a cancerous cash grab movement that takes away most of the modern GPUs power that could flow into stuff that actually makes games look and feel(physics) better.

I wish more people would realize "Lesbianism" is a mental illness fueled by the inability to grow up.

So is communism. Loads of shit people do these days stem from issues with their parents and unresolved issues that came from their rebellious phase.

...

Disgusting.

Old games should be played in their native 4:3 resolutions.

Let's take Counter-Strike for example.

800x600 feels like you really control your character. It's smooth.

1920x1080 feels clunky, awkward, as if you're controlling a tank. It just doesn't feel right.

Do you have evidence for this argument?

I would agree with that, but the main stem of "muh communism" I've seen boils down to two things:

These are the two traits I always see in commies, especially the ones that are self-labeled commies. They always want someone else to do the work for them, give them money they refuse to earn, etc.


Go outside and deal with lesbians. I can promise you every single one of them either had mommy issues, or "chose" to be a lesbian because they couldn't grow up and deal with the fact a man's different from them.

"4K" monitors (actually UHD, not true DCI 4K) are in the $300 range now. Yeah, it costs 3x a FHD one, but I think that's not too absurd a price. Even gaming PCs powerful enough to run vidya in UHD are not super expensive anymore.

Yeah but user, some of us have to pay bills.

Most people I've met are fucked up people with mommy/daddy issues and can't grow up and deal with the fact that people are different from them. That's not evidence for anything but that most people are retarded. By "evidence" I don't mean anecdotes. Please, some statistics or data, not just "did you ever notice" bullshit.

I fucking hate these sorts of people, they're on par with the sorts of people who buy workstation GPUs or server CPUs without doing any research, and then bitch that games run like shit on their $20,000 Frankenstein setup.

Well, thats just a silly assertion to make. Obviously people with monitors larger than 45-50 inches and content creators will benefit greatly from resolutions above 1080p
Well for regular PC gaming sure, but again, for content creation purposes, as a TV, or some sort of public display its beneficial.

You need to chose your words better OP. Because you're not necessarily wrong, the pixel density of 1080p is more than enough to handle screen sizes as high as 40 inches for regular gaming. Resolutions higher than that are just a waste of GPU power and there is no fucking way anyone would need a screen larger than 40 inches on their desk just to play vidya

Since when? Duel 1080s don't get 60fps on most games with decent graphics and if you are use to 100+ fps forget about it.

...

What the actual fuck am I reading?

Yes there are games that will get decent frames but the majority wont making 4k pointless for now.

Try social fucking awareness. Oculus was the most visible and hyped VR vendor at the time they were purchased, and subsequently announced that they would run only "Facebook approved" apps. Obviously the market and the Oculus stance on apps has changed dramatically, however a strongly negative impression was made early on, much like how the Xbone was honest and truly fucked once they announced that you wouldn't be able to let friends borrow games, and its hype and popularity tanked.

If you work with computers, or are a student. I guess here those particular demographics are overly represented, I was just challenging your assertion that there is no argument against 4k, which there certainly is if you don't work with computers, and are not a student.


This is true. We are in agreeance.


I am sure there are many real lesbians, however I am also sure there are many women who simply wish they were, and act accordingly - same as how there are many married women who simply wish they were "pure and good housewives" when in reality they cheat/lie/manipulated, etc.

People are just sick in general, and I mean that in a very grave way. One of the most horrifying social phenomena, to me, is the occurence of lesbian parents, who are so obviously attempting to emulate the natural model of a family. That is just the most pathetic thing in the world, and I don't mean that with even a hint of condescension, I mean that with nothing but pity. They are clearly unable to make their own children as a result of their choices, and their sickness leads them to "choose" a child, in every case indoctrinate them that there is "No such thing as a normal family" (When so clearly they are the ones who are attempting to become exactly that) and damage the child in the process, while damaging themselves.

I really see too much of this shit for what it is to consider having a family. So many desperate and unloved people struggling to start over. So many people wishing that starting a new family would erase the past of their own family.

Then again most of the people in my life growing up were drug abusers. I see well-adjusted people at my work who had enjoyable childhoods engaging in relationships and dialogue that is so clearly unweighted by the early loss of innocence, and I am so sick that I almost wonder, "What is wrong with them?"

I know you're being facetious, but a program that doesn't support arbitrary resolutions or aspect ratios within a reasonable range is badly developed, bar none. If a program doesn't at least support between 90 and 300 DPI and between 4:3 and 2:1 aspect ratios, it was badly programmed. It's not "please support 112:80", it's "you programmed this specifically for only your monitor, when you expect multiple people to use your program".

If a game crashes on launch because it's confronted with an aspect ratio it doesn't understand, it was badly programmed. A program of any sort (including a video game) should never assume a single specific aspect ratio or even just a set of specific ones.

You need to choose your boards better. You're not wrong, but this is a video game board so it should be fucking obvious he's talking purely within the realms of video games.

Enjoy your eye cancer, nerd.

Sli is shit and you need to go back to reddit

Shit that never happened. The only "scandal" that happened was a driver update that deliberately destroyed HMD emulation that let you play Oculus games on SteamVR HMDs, and even then they reverted it under peer pressure. Oculus SDK doesn't support any other headsets so Oculus-exclusive games can't be readily played on other HMDs. And there was this one emulator that let you do just that. They broke it, but then they backed the fuck up. You can produce VR games using Oculus SDK without any approval and whatnot from kikebergs and it'll run just fine.

babeltechreviews.com/gtx-1080-ti-sli-performance-25-games/3/

While they are close they do drop below 60 on many games. Personally after making the switch to 144hz last year I hate playing under 100 fps now but if you have never played over 60 it wouldn't worry you.

I got my marketing buzzwords mixed up. I forgot UHD is 4k while 1080p is Full HD and 720p is just plain HD. My bad I thought he was the retarded one but I guess the egg is on my face

Oh I agree completely, but that doesn't change the fact that it happens, and it's really something that should be seriously considered when straying outside of the more normal aspect ratios.

It's like airbags in a car - you shouldn't need them because, ideally, everyone should be following the rules of the road, but you have them because what should happen and what does happen are vastly different things. Likewise, you shouldn't need to limit yourself to the most popular aspect ratios, but if you want to play every single slapdash 8-year-old Japanese console title port that gets released, chances are you're going to have to.

My issue isn't so much that "straying outside the norm is bad!" My complaints are more with the super-early adopters or those who just have pathological aversions to following established trends and insist on buying expensive, often hyper-specialist, components only to complain when their poorly-researched build fucks them in the ass.

...

It's an easy mistake to make, they can't even decide if they want to use the vertical or horizontal resolution to define the XXXXp.

It was all width until a marketing faggot got the awesome idea of putting the bigger number there because it obviously has to be better.

...

There are plenty of papers about child mental health and progress from dyke families. Dyke in the house is absolutely detrimental to children's psyche, and no doubt that's for a reason.

They were originally saying that software would need to be purchased from their App Store, which is exaclty like Apple's model, and is exactly what Microsoft is talking about doing next. Then they said that they would allow apps to run on the device that weren't from the app store. This was very early on, before the fucking dev kits were even made available to the public IIRC.

...

Okay.

...

>tfw [email protected]/* */

...

No you see I've been following Oculus very closely since kikestarter, I still have my DK1 gathering dust on the shelf. And I know it never happened because it never fucking did - I would be there if someone told me that St. Luckey was gonna fuck shit up like that back in 2013.

And besides, you're the one making claims. It is therefore your obligation to corroborate, not mine to prove the opposite.

You should watch a video before using it as source for an argument.

But the eye can't see any more than 24 fps so that's more than sufficient! :^)

Then it's likely I read some extremely hyperbolic article about it regarding the app store. I made a half-assed attempt to find articles a couple replies back but it's a bad signal/noise ratio with shit like this that's hyped up constantly.

It's funny you supported the Kikestarter, though. Thanks for that.

If this were about massive PPIs on tiny fucking smartphone screens then we could talk.
1440p is about 490 PPI on a 6 inch screen, and 108 PPI on a 27 inch monitor. 4K is 163 PPI. (Then we wonder why smartphone battery life sucks ass when they waste energy rendering pixels at a density you can't discern unless you hold your phone stupidly close to your face)

At the time of kekstarter the only VR HMDs were these shitty helmets from the 90's. And the guy just strapped a smartphone screen to one of those, turned out pretty good. That means higher quality VR HMDs can be made, so why the fuck not.

The device was delivered, and built to spec so no disappointment there, and the whole thing did jumpstart VR HMD manufacturing again. It's not going as fast as people had hoped due to price gouging, but it's still doing fairly well. PSVR takes substantial share, and Nintendo is digging into the concept to make VR console again pokemon VR fucking when gayfreak. In the end, all is well.

As of today it is a gimmick because nothing can run most games at 60+ fps @ 4k.
I'm not saying "lol res is bad, more jaggies and AA plz" I'm saying that you have to be a fool to buy it today. Give it 2 or 3 years and I could be running 4k myself but I'm not going to today because I like 1440p @ 144 fps more than I like 2160p @ 30 fps.

Someone upload that screenshot of a game running at 30fps vs 60fps.

We are in agreeance.


Surely you cannot be this retarded.


Oh, I see. Yes. Whether or not a good or service is a gimmick is dependent on your need for it. Yard service? Total gimmick - I live in an apartment. Maybe in 2-3 years when I have a house with a yard then I might purchase some yard service myself.

We are on Holla Forums - vidya so when I say 4k is pointless today I am talking about for vidya. It's great for TV and movies and if you watch enough TV and movies to justify it then go ahead but don't be that guy who buys a peripheral before there is hardware to support it because it makes manufactures think we are all that stupid and leads to worst service in the long run.

Sony - "We told them it was amazing 4k then downscaled and still can't get 30 fps but we sure are selling a lot of TVs".
You can see how this hurts us all right?

It's not pointless, it's just for enthusiasts only. Not bang for buck kinds of people like we may be. People who OC their ram and graphics cards and shit.

This only hurts goyim who are stupid enough to buy cutting edge shit. It benefits the people outside of vidya who have a very realistic use case for the resolution, and they are the ones who will bring down the costs of the monitors right around the time the graphics cards and developers are catching up with being able to take advantage of it.

That's just how technological progression works in a capitalist society.

Enthusiasts that care about res more than framerate, I am an enthusiast and know several others and none of us are ever going below 100 fps again let alone below 60.

They don't need to "catch up" they just need to release the cards they designed 5 years ago but have been sitting on because incremental hardware improvements are more profitable than releasing your best design and having to start the R & D cycle all over again, that's just how profiteering works in a capitalist society :^)

Explain how literal faggots advertising themselves on Holla Forums are any better.

It's not good, but it's significantly better than a run-of-the-mill 16:9 shortscreen.
16:11 would be better. 16:12 would be godly. Any manufacturer listening?

Out of a mix of boredom and curiosity I just measured my comfortable field of view @ 70cm from my face and found 27:20 to be perfect for me.

You do realize that 4k without antialiasing is as computationally expensive as 1080p with 4xMSAA, right? Literally everything you are saying about 4k is as applicable to antialiasing. You'd have to be seriously on budget hardware to not be able to run 4k without AA at a solid 60 FPS. It sounds to me like you are assuming things and that you've never tried.
You said you'd rather have [email protected]/* */ than [email protected]/* */, but 1440p is 2560x1440, or 3.7 MP, and 2160p is 3840x2160, or 8.3MP, which is 2.25 times the size. If you are absolutely maxing out at [email protected]/* */, using 2160p at the same settings would bring you down to 64hz, not 30. If you were using 1440p with AA, using 2160p without would drop you to 128hz, a negligible difference with a quality improvement. Exaggerating to prove a point means you don't have a point, because you have to lie in order to make your position sound reasonable.

The fuck are you talking about?

Oh, and that last computation was considering 2xAA, not even 4x, and all of it is assuming a linear increase, which isn't necessarily true, as it depends on how expensive the fraagment shaders, tesselation shaders, and geometry shaders are. Increased resolution only increases load on the vertex shader and pixel bandwidth, so if most of the game's processing is outside the fragment shader, you'll see a much smaller drop in framerate with a resolution increase. So the calculations I give are a worst-case scenario in normal circumstances. The only case in which it will get worse is if you have shit motherboard bandwidth and are playing a game that does CPU-bound HDR rendering, which isn't common these days.

I agree that a pro for 4k is you don't need AA but AA has been around so long there are dedicated pipes on modern GPUs greatly reducing it's cost.

As for
>If you are absolutely maxing out at [email protected]/* */, using 2160p at the same settings would bring you down to 64hz
instead of assuming you are lying to support your argument I'm just going to assume you don't realize all the work GPUs do for things like lighting, particle effects, ambient occlusion ect. that greatly increase GPU load when res increases. Give it a go yourself by benchmarking then dropping the res and benchmarking again to see if your idea that the number of pixels directly relates to framerate.

That's literally a rounding error away from 4:3. It was the standard for a reason.

Yes! Those exactly! I am not asking what your preferences or needs are in any way! If I got to play an RTS at 9999999999 FPS, I honestly would not give a fuck! If I got to play an RTS or RTT in 4K from a super high angle, I might think that was actually pretty fucking cool.

You're just not getting that the validity of products does not revolve around your personal tastes.


Then stop fucking buying new hardware! I am running a computer I built in 2010 and have slowly upgraded because I don't give a flying fuck about cutting edge/AAA anything. I am planning on building a ryzen computer once Vega is released, and that will be my computer for the next 7-8 years. Incremental hardware releases do not affect me, because I am the kid who could not only resist eating the marshmallow set in front of me, but save the two I was rewarded with when the test proctor returned.

You've gotta be fucking kidding me. Are we going to wipe redditards asses for them as well? Christ, this place is getting gentrified.

I WANT THE EVER-MULTIPLYING CANCEROUS NIGGERS OF THE INTERNET TO LEAVE. THIS MEANS YOU, REDDIT'

All of that work increases linearly with resolution; there's no typical reason you'd see a non-linear increase for anything like lighting, partical effects, or ambient occlusion when they're done right, as most of that is done as relatively simple fragment-shader effects. Most shadow work uses a constant-size shadow buffer that's not the same size as the viewport framebuffer.
I do realise all of that work, I've done lots of graphics programming with Vulkan and OpenGL. If you see a non-linear change with resolution, it's probably because you're making a previously vertex-bound program fragment-bound, or you're being restricted by bandwidth somewhere.

Again, a resolution change should, in a well-developed program, create a linear change in fragment buffer computation requirements, and usually roughly linear change in program requirements at worst.


Email protection is just so you can use an email address without it getting scraped by bots. It's been here for pretty much forever. Refresh the page and you'll see the original text, they've just broken the javascript thread updater, which doesn't work with it anymore.

People shouldn't feel comfortable posting their personal information on this site in any way, and shouldn't be protected from themselves. This isn't a preschool-tier forum. I digress.

It's not just about posting your own, but any email address in general. My main point is that it's been here for a very long time; it's not something new.

I've only been here since 2014. Guess I just haven't noticed it.

I have a 1680x1050 monitor and it's great aside from the fact most videos are letterboxed and there are even some games that do it too.

if you make a game that "supports" 16x10 and have it in a fucking letterbox you should kill yourself, pronto.

You probably didn't notice it because they only broke the thread updater relatively recently (a couple months ago) and people don't usually put things that look like email addresses in their posts. Before that it was generally invisible.

I feel like you're trying to tell us something.

You're one of the few people who have a use for 4K. Most people are just jumping on it because of marketing pushing it so hard.
Really though there is no 4K content and unless you're actually using the extra resolution for productivity there is no point getting a 4K screen any time soon. It will remain a meme for a few more years at least.

a proper 4k image is very fucking noticeable form any couch.

get a real 4k tv.

I'm not going to lie, it's very late here and I can't brain, can you be bothered doing the maths on these results?

1920x1200 came out before and it better for computers, 1080p is a meme, seen as the fact that you can call it "FullHD".

You bought one ore more meme monitors made to look at the electric Jew and you dare call other formats jokes.

o

pic unrelated


Seems to disprove his assertion, however a shitfling about the inaccuracy or bias of certain synthetic, hypothetical, real-world, or 4th-dimensional testing scenario would quickly dismiss your hard data as an isolated incident.


Anime girl is cute and correct.

I'm going to have a crack at this but as I said the sun is rising from last night so any inaccuracy in my calculations isn't any bias and simply a failure to brain.

1280 x 720 = 921,600
1920 x 1080 = 2,073,600
2560 x 1440 = 3,686,400

720p vs 1080p
2,073,600 / 921,600 = 2.24 ratio
206.8 / 160.2 - 1.29 ratio
I lost less performance than I expected, I expected a frame drop ration above the pixel count ratio.

1080p vs 1440p
3,686,400 / 2,073,600 = 1.77 ratio
160.2 / 97.6 = 1.64 ratio
Once again I lost less performance than expected but much closer than in the 720p vs 1080p case.

As the res increasing seems to drive it closer to the expected performance loss I would be very interested to see the 4k results but alas I can't run it at 4k.
If some kind user with a 4k monitor is willing to do some testing we could put this argument to bed with hard data rather than shitflinging.

What could the reason POSSIBLY BE…

Kill all faggots. Kill all trannies.

pastebin.com/jaHkuPy9
pastebin.com/6tzc3ZnT
pastebin.com/tTpmNyLs

I just realized I missed one.

720p vs 1440p
3,686,400 / 921,600 = 4 ratio
206.8 / 97.6 = 2.12 ratio

This does make it look like increasing resolution leads to diminishing returns in performance which I could have proven by linking every benchmark ever but this was more fun.

Yes, and?

This isn't it, but it's the same thing
boallen.com/fps-compare-html5.html

And then the graphics have to improve more.

It never fucking ends. These idiots are chasing their own tails.

More effort and money for the same results, while still fucking up everything else.

That lacks one setting more
30 fps with a bit of motion blur for muh cinemagic experince

Get a 4k TV and play fucking what on it? That one nature video that they show in stores to get idiots with too much money like you to buy it?

Like I said, the worst case scenario is an increased resolution being a linear decrease in performance. 1080p is 2.25 the pixels as 720p, but it doesn't half the performance (each frame takes roughly 1.3 times as long) because there is more to unigine than pumping pixels, and increasing resolution only increases load on pixel pumping (ie. fragment processing), so most of the time at 720p is spent on non-fragment processing. 1440p, however is 1.77 times the pixels as 1080p, and each frame takes 1.64 times as long, so the bottleneck at that resolution turns into pumping pixels.

The point is that when you hit a certain resolution, the processing necessary is going to be predominantly fragment processing, and you'll start seeing linear decrease in performance. Before that point, you'll see better than a linear decrease, because you are shifting the bottleneck away from vertex processing and CPU processing, which will always be independent of resolution and won't change either way.

Basically, if you had a resolution of 0x0, each frame would still take time, because there is other processing involved, and vertices and other things still need to be pumped. Each pixel you add over your GPU's thread limit will add linearly to this base processing time. The increase in resource requirement is still linear, but it's not linear from a base of 0, due to the other processing required. It just starts to look that way when you get incredibly large, because the base resources required get comparatively smaller when you look at your total resource requirement.

Check out this spreadsheet and graph of your data to get an idea of what I mean. It's roughly linear, and the point at which it hits 0 on the X axis is the minimum requirements from other processing. It's not exactly correct (because there are other costs due to bandwidth and occasionally CPU/GPU communication associated with extra pixels), but it is roughly correct almost all of the time.

...

I have two monitors. One 1024x768 monitor that runs at 75hz and a 1920x1080 tv

Fuck, Wrong picture

You are a plebe who is content to play plebe games. I want to see 20/20 vision in a HMD and play military flight sims.

no it wouldn't nothing has to be displayed

What is that picture showing?

...

But that does account for the fact the pixel count ratio change to framerate change should be 1:1 in a perfect world while 2.24 / 1.29 = 1.74 while 1.77 / 1.64 = 1.08 that is a change of 61.1% instead of the 0% you are claiming when you say it's linear.

While these results are specific to my machine I think it's shows it isn't linear at all.

Care to run some beanchmarks at the same settings while varying resolution for SCIENCE?

>>>/israel/
>>>/back/

There is absolutely no reason for resolutions higher than 800x600px and any flatter than 12 inches is a fucking meme.

Now do you see how retarded you sound?

I don't use this Mac to play games

Mein Neger

There is absolutely no reason for resolutions higher than 640x480px and any monitor with more than 256 colors is a fucking meme.

Prove me the fuck wrong.

Take the greatest vidya of all time as proof.

It absolutely would, because there is much more to rendering than just spitting pixels out. It would still have to push all the necessary changing vertex data to the GPU, push the bones to the GPU, and make all the necessary GPU calls, not to mention the regular CPU-side processing that isn't used for rendering. Frame time is the combination of all rendering and processing work during frame, not just the amount of time it takes to blit pixels to the screen, otherwise it would be a useless metric. Frame time is also not the same thing as rendering time.


Like I said, it is roughly linear, but it is not linear from a base of 0, due to the baseline non-pixel processing work involved, and also the diminishing effects of bandwidth. When you get too big, your bandwidth will limit the amount of pixels you can push (but it doesn't much matter, as every video card has a max allowed resolution), and when you get too small, you won't be able to put the massive number of GPU cores to good use. From about 1 MP up, though, you will see roughly linear results. Feel free to test it out at various resolutions and see what happens.

muh golden ratio readability, it's the best aspect ratio that functions best with all animals with eyes

I can't wait until prosthetic limbs are so much stronger, faster and more flexible than organic limbs that elective limb replacement surgery becomes a trend among perfectly healthy people.

What about it?

Dude, 4k Super Monkey Ball is the shit.

I'm okay with 1080p. Bigger screens I would have to use from a distance because having that much light shining at my eyes is retarded. If I had desk space, I would add a side screen that would not be used during multiplayer gaming.

...

1920x1200 is larger than 1920x1080 and 16:10 is better for working on and for vidya incompetent devs aside than 16:9.

I fucking love you cunts.

That's 16:10 also user. A lot of old games actually support that better than 16:9.

Don't forget vertical FoV locks.

Lesbians causes
1: sexual abuse
2: emotional abuse from a male
3: for attention