Is a 4K display worth it?

[SCG_motoadve]

I have a 42 inch display ,which I put about 4 ft away , works real nice.

But black Friday prices here in the USA are crazy low.

 

Is a 4K display worth it for gaming? does the video card has to work harder and you loose some frames?

How does BOX look in 4K?

[Dakpilot]

I moved up from a 40" 1080p to 50" 4K,and I was very happy with the upgrade.

 

Bear in mind that there is a considerably larger amount of pixels to run depending on previous resolution. I sit arms length and the high resolution is great on that size screen, you will need a good GPU , I am currently in process of getting a better card but I was still impressed by the performance of Gtx970 however that really would be the minimum to use. Be wary of very old ones that can only do full rgb at 30hz,should be rare now though.

Everyone's personal requirements/preferences will be different, but for me it was a worthwhile upgrade

 

Cheers Dakpilot

[Bullets]

I am waiting until 4k monitors have a higher refresh rate... I love my 144hz monitor too much to sacrafice FPS for pixels atm 

[Herne]

I have a 28" 4k monitor and I love it, games look great !!
 

Now it only gets used to launch IL2 in VR because Il2 + VR = adrenaline rush, and I have become an adrenaline junkie

[Voidhunger]

I have a 42 inch display ,which I put about 4 ft away , works real nice.

But black Friday prices here in the USA are crazy low.

 

Is a 4K display worth it for gaming? does the video card has to work harder and you loose some frames?

How does BOX look in 4K?

 

Out of curiosity what is crazy low price for 4k in Seattle?

[216th_Jordan]

To be honest I think a higher Hz is more important than 4k. If you get a 144 hz 2k (2560x1440) monitor with g-sync or free-sync I think you will have far better results with Il-2 (and thats also what I read from most people here).

[Herne]

To be honest I think a higher Hz is more important than 4k. If you get a 144 hz 2k (2560x1440) monitor with g-sync or free-sync I think you will have far better results with Il-2 (and thats also what I read from most people here).

 

1080's in SLI are able to push 60 FPS in ultra settings for most games though. RoF held pretty steady at near 60 FPS, and BoX pre shadows enhancements was also 60 FPS.

I only get to see BoX on the monitor these days when I play back flight recordings, to make vids occasionally for YT. 

 

I think if I could turn the clocks back and do it over, I might go for a 1440p @ 60 hz just so that I could use a single GPU. I'm guessing for 144hz You would still be looking at sli GPU's ?

[FuriousMeow]

I think if I could turn the clocks back and do it over, I might go for a 1440p @ 60 hz just so that I could use a single GPU. I'm guessing for 144hz You would still be looking at sli GPU's ?

 

I never drop below 100fps at 1440p with a single 1080Ti (i7-4770k @ 4.4GHz with HyperThreading disabled) at Ultra with 4x FSAA and 16x Anisotropic, graphics options set to max in this series. But it's a GSync, so while it is 144Hz it really doesn't matter - smoothest display I've ever had.

 

Freesync I haven't tried, but I hear it's the same as GSync as far as quality goes - if it's a good monitor - so the actual 144Hz matters little as long as the card can push above 80fps at all times - for the smoothest display.

 

I'd go Freesync/Gsync at 2560x1440 with a high quality card over 4K but that's, of course, a personal opinion.

 

Also, 4K display means more memory on the card is required. A LOT more memory.

Edited November 23, 2017 by FuriousMeow

[Mitthrawnuruodo]

If you are currently using a 60 Hz panel, 4K will be great as long as your computer is sufficiently powerful (modern quad-core CPU and GTX 970 at minimum).

 

However, if you have been using a panel with a higher refresh rate, 4K may feel like a downgrade. If that is the case, wait until you can get a 144 Hz 4K panel.

 

Also remember that not all 4K panels are equal for gaming. Technologies such as G-sync can create a much more enjoyable experience.

[Dakpilot]

I watched memory VRam usage quite carefully, although this was quite a while ago, I never saw it go above 4gb and normally around 3.5gb,anyome have any current figures?

It is obviously very subjective but I am sure I prefer larger screen at 60fps, (I have not experienced a good Gsync/144hz screen so my reference is poor) what is the largest Gsync screen available and comparable price to 50" 4K screen.

I guess this will all be redundant when comparable 4K results comes to VR, but I think we are a few years away yet

 

Cheers Dakpilot

[FuriousMeow]

Video card RAM usage will vary between titles, start using higher res skins and memory usage will go up here as well. So that video card RAM usage was a warning for all games, not just here.

[Dakpilot]

Video card RAM usage will vary between titles, start using higher res skins and memory usage will go up here as well. So that video card RAM usage was a warning for all games, not just here.

No worries, I have been away for quite a bit and not been able to play, am currently fixing my PC and will soon be running be updating GPu, so I was interested in current BoS usage, bit redundant I guess as 8gb seems to be min on most higher end new cards now, so should be fine?

 

Cheers Dakpilot

[Mitthrawnuruodo]

VRAM is not a concern with cards that should be used for 4K attempts. With few exceptions, other limits will be hit before memory runs out.

[216th_Jordan]

1080's in SLI are able to push 60 FPS in ultra settings for most games though. RoF held pretty steady at near 60 FPS, and BoX pre shadows enhancements was also 60 FPS.

I only get to see BoX on the monitor these days when I play back flight recordings, to make vids occasionally for YT. 

 

I think if I could turn the clocks back and do it over, I might go for a 1440p @ 60 hz just so that I could use a single GPU. I'm guessing for 144hz You would still be looking at sli GPU's ?

 

I usually get between 120 - 150 fps with my 1070 on 'High' settings at 1440p. For me fluidity is paramount (and I don't get that at 60 Hz), always depends on whats most important for you. Just ordered a 144 Hz screen with gysnc, will see how it compares.

[SCG_Tzigy]

4k, G-sync at 60 here

Looks amazing. 

[Jade_Monkey]

Haven't used it for gaming but the 4K tv for the living room looks amazing.

 

I should bring down the pc to my living room and try it out over the long weekend.

[F/JG300_Gruber]

4K 40" monitor user here (60hz), and very happy with it. 

Transition from 1080p to 4k in BoS was one of the biggest slap in the face for this year.

 

I will never look back, neither for the size nor the resolution of the screen. 

If I was to ever change this monitor, I would probably wait for a huge 21:9 2160p curved one to be released, if they ever plan to build some.

 

Performance wise, with a GTX 1080 and i7 7700K, all maxed out (except SSAO and HDR) I get a constant 60fps on most situations, with a occasionnal drop to ~50fps in furballs with heavy, low level clouds.

[Bullets]

https://arstechnica.co.uk/gadgets/2017/04/acer-predator-x27-price-specs-release-date/ Will be purchasing this first thing 2018   

 

edit: OH and another 1080ti to try to reach those frames on BOX haha 

Edited November 23, 2017 by Bullets

[SharpeXB]

Yes a 4K display is magnificent for flight sims, provided you have a strong enough graphics card. I was running 4K on 2x Titan X and although those were capable of handling any game at ultra graphics and 60fps those are very $ and actually put out a ton of heat. A single 1080 Ti now out performs those and runs much cooler.

4K is very nice looking but honestly for other games, if the extra resolution comes at the cost of lower graphics settings, it’s not optimal. Other games don’t benefit from the higher res the way flight sims do.

The ability to see and ID other aircraft and even see your own instruments without zooming in is really nice.

 

I am waiting until 4k monitors have a higher refresh rate... I love my 144hz monitor too much to sacrafice FPS for pixels atm

I don’t know if there will be cables or graphics cards that can handle higher than 2160p/60 any time soon Edited November 23, 2017 by SharpeXB

[SCG_Fenris_Wolf]

It is worth it. But for flying IL-2, VR is even more worth it. I have both, and I can't go back to 4k monitor gaming. The resolution does not matter/is perceived differently in VR. You don't get much pixelated view nowadays anymore, they did a lot software-wise.

[Mitthrawnuruodo]

Indeed, the future certainly belongs to VR. However, this generation has so many limitations that it is not really practical for more casual users.

[Bullets]

I don’t know if there will be cables or graphics cards that can handle higher than 2160p/60 any time soon

 

It uses 2 1.4 display ports.

[=TBAS=Sshadow14]

OP u can test how 4K will effect your current system FPS wise

If you have Nvidia card.
any 1080P monitor can run 4K using DSR
Im sure ati has a similar thing.

4K DSR on 1080P monitor is the same fps/ hardware hit as 4K on 4K monitor

[Bullets]

OP u can test how 4K will effect your current system FPS wise

 

If you have Nvidia card.

any 1080P monitor can run 4K using DSR

Im sure ati has a similar thing.

 

4K DSR on 1080P monitor is the same fps/ hardware hit as 4K on 4K monitor

 

and remember when doing the test to turn off all the sampling / texture filtering you wont need to be using with a 4k monitor

[=TBAS=Sshadow14]

4K wont stop the issues that lack of anisotropy gives you..

without using anisitropy filtering you are going back to trilinear filters which does the same thing at a much lower quality.

If you pc cant run 60fps @ 4K with 16x AF on Ultra Preset with HDr and SSAO then your pc in underpowered to run IL2 @ 4K

[Bullets]

I don't run HDR or SSAO anyway think it ruins the image. And tbf I was mostly talking about supersampling which I thought you didnt need when running at 4k 

 

edit: as that is the only real form of filtering that eats up fps in my experience

Edited November 24, 2017 by Bullets

[NETSCAPE]

I just got a 34" 3440x1440p Dell, 60hz, 8ms. My new computer runs this game butter smooth with maxed out settings. To me a steady 60 frames is a new world coming from the potato PC I was using previously. So I am happy. I understand people wanting 144hz but for me it is just not worth the price, response rates also get absurdly expensive for large displays. I typically fly bomber/attack by my nature...however the biggest thing I notice now is how much "easier" dog fighting can potentially be, just due to performance increase AND wider view for better situational awareness.

[chiliwili69]

 

 

Indeed, the future certainly belongs to VR. However, this generation has so many limitations that it is not really practical for more casual users.

 

It is just my opinion, but I think you should try VR in IL-2 before spending in a 4K monintor.

 

I bought my current (almost unused) 4k G-sync monitor 3 year ago:

 

https://forum.il2sturmovik.com/topic/13633-3840x2160-g-sync-and-one-gtx970

 

If you have an 970 card (or lower) then it is a must to have G-sync

If you have an 1070 card or above you might not need G-Sync for a 60Hz monitor.

 

I made some performance tests using the VR performance test for FullHD, 2K and 4K with my 1070 card:

 

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1gJmnz_nVxI6_dG_UYNCCpZVK2-f8NBy-y1gia77Hu_k

 

I have seen one or two people who were using 4K monitor, try VR and they get back to 4K monitor. But almost all people who were using monitor and try VR IL-2 never go back to monitor again (including many 4K users like me).

 

In any case, I will buy Rift/Odyssey without doubt, but since you have not test VR you can buy both, a 4K monitor and a Rift/Odyssey, and I will deliver back the one I don´t like.

 

Be aware that certain Windows MR have a bug with IPD/FOV.

[Bullets]

I am waiting for 2018.. 4K 144hz & Pimax 8K vr & BoOB   2018 going to be year of the best sim experience to date..

[FrozenLiquidity]

I have a 42 inch display ,which I put about 4 ft away , works real nice.

But black Friday prices here in the USA are crazy low.

 

Is a 4K display worth it for gaming? does the video card has to work harder and you loose some frames?

How does BOX look in 4K?

 

Hello fellow Seattlite!

 

What is the resolution of your current 42 inch display?

 

I was using a 42 inch 1080p display up until recently, picked up a Rift during the summer price drop, and just recently picked up a 49 inch 4k screen that I now use as my monitor - all powered by a 980ti.  That said, my impressions might provide useful and relevant feedback for you.

 

At 1080p across 42 inches looks like garbage to some people, but I had been using that size and resolution for a while so I had gotten quite used to it and was fine with it.  Going from that to 4k was a huge leap in clarity and the game looks absolutely fantastic at 4k, though the texture resolutions and other limitations are a bit more obvious.  I wouldn't consider going back to my old display at this point, and I definitely think that a 4k monitor of sufficient size would be worth the investment (I would imagine you'd get something similar in size to your current one).  The real crux of the issue would be the other things you're using it for.

 

I will say that productivity, reading and general browsing is a bit less comfortable at 4k (without any scaling), but with this large of a display it hasn't been a real issue and I've gotten used to it.  I think the real question you need to ask yourself is will a display like that suit your needs outside of flight sims?  I am not sure what those are, so I can only guess.  For me, it's been a worthwhile investment and would pull the trigger again if I had to.

 

A lot of people on this thread have been advocating for VR.  Having one of these devices myself, I still find myself going between 4k and VR when playing BoS.  I think this puts me in the minority.  VR in BoS is a fantastic experience, but I found myself having a lot more issues locating ground targets, spotting, and especially identifying aircraft when using the VR headset.  On the plus side, the immersion is as good as it can possibly get, and the ability to more accurately gauge spatial differences and distances lead to an immediate improvement in gunnery.  Of course, this does little good if you can't get a positive ID on a bogey, so I've stuck with mostly the 4k display for multiplayer, and VR for singleplayer.  I find myself going between them fairly regularly though.  Spotting between 1080 and 4k I feel that I've had an easier time seeing distant targets with lower resolutions, even with a larger display, the increased dot pitch makes pixel-spotting distant aircraft a bit more difficult, but I feel that the visual improvements make up for it. 

 

Let me know if you have any questions, I hope this helps!

[SCG_motoadve]

Thanks for the replies, want to test VR so might meet soon for that.

[SharpeXB]

It uses 2 1.4 display ports.

Looks like HDMI 2.1 will support 4K 120hz

https://www.theverge.com/circuitbreaker/2017/11/28/16710568/hdmi-new-specification-10k-resolution-future-proof-standard