this post was submitted on 15 Jun 2025
640 points (99.5% liked)

PC Gaming

11406 readers
965 users here now

For PC gaming news and discussion. PCGamingWiki

Rules:

  1. Be Respectful.
  2. No Spam or Porn.
  3. No Advertising.
  4. No Memes.
  5. No Tech Support.
  6. No questions about buying/building computers.
  7. No game suggestions, friend requests, surveys, or begging.
  8. No Let's Plays, streams, highlight reels/montages, random videos or shorts.
  9. No off-topic posts/comments, within reason.
  10. Use the original source, no clickbait titles, no duplicates. (Submissions should be from the original source if possible, unless from paywalled or non-english sources. If the title is clickbait or lacks context you may lightly edit the title.)

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Well I am shocked, SHOCKED I say! Well, not that shocked.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] endeavor@sopuli.xyz 24 points 2 days ago (1 children)

And still have your house burn down due to it just being a 2080 that has 9.8 jiggawats pushed into it.

There isn't a single reason to get any of the 5 series imo, they don't offer anything. And i say that as a 3d artist for games.

Edit: nevermind i remember some idiots got roped into 4k for gaming and are now paying the price like marketing wanted them to.

[–] IncogCyberspaceUser@lemmy.world 7 points 2 days ago (2 children)

What's wrong with 4k gaming? Just curious

[–] endeavor@sopuli.xyz 9 points 1 day ago (1 children)

You pay ton more money for a screen thats ppi is too dense to matter only to to pay ton more money for a pc to still run it at terrible framerate with lowered settings and fake frames.

4k is a pure scam.

[–] CybranM@feddit.nu 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Have you tried 4k? The difference is definitely noticeable unless you play on like a 20" screen

[–] endeavor@sopuli.xyz 1 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (2 children)

Yes its pointless, most noticable is the low frame rate and lowered graphics to make the game playable. High fps is more noticable and useful. Blind tests confirmed that, even the one ltt did.

2k could be argued is solid but even then the ppi is so dense already it does not really matter.

Edit: then again there is some research showing people preceive fps and ppindifferently so it may be 4k makes sense for some while for others its really overpriced 2k that no pc can run.

[–] CybranM@feddit.nu 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Not arguing FPS here lol. Arguing 4k, which you can run in 144hz in a lot of games even without a 5090, you failed to mention if you had tried 4k which I assume you haven't based on the switch to FPS instead of resolution

[–] Robust_Mirror@aussie.zone 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I play in 1080p so can't comment on 4k but I can confirm fps doesn't seem to affect me after 30fps. I don't perceive a noticeable difference between 30, 60, 120fps. Haven't played higher than that. I suspect 4k would probably look better to me than a higher fps though. But I'm happy with 30-60fps and 1080p so...

[–] endeavor@sopuli.xyz 1 points 21 hours ago

I went to 2k 100hz uw from 1080p 144hz. I stopped noticing the increased framerate pretty quickly as the "mouse so smooth" effects wear off fast. But the ultrawide huge fov is a massive plus. I don't notice the resolution increase at all beyond lower frames and more text on screen in docs.

Laptops 4k is just 1080p with extra battery drain and worse performance.

[–] Damage@feddit.it 3 points 2 days ago (2 children)

Somehow 4k resolution got a bad rep in the computing world, with people opposing it for both play and productivity.

"You can't see the difference at 50cm away!" or something like that. Must be bad eyesight I guess.

[–] GrindingGears@lemmy.ca 11 points 2 days ago (1 children)

It's just kind of unnecessary. Gaming in 1440p on something the size of your average computer monitor, hell even just good ol' 1080 HD, is more than sufficient. I mean 1080 to 4k sure there's a difference, but 1440p it's a lot harder to tell. Nobody cares about your mud puddle reflections cranking along in a game at 120 fps. At least not the normies.

Putting on my dinosaur hat for a second, I spent the first decade of my life gaming in 8/16 bit and 4 color CGA, and I've probably spent the last thirty years and god only knows how much money trying to replicate those experiences.

[–] Damage@feddit.it 5 points 1 day ago

I mean I play at 1440p and I think it's fine... Well it's 3440x1440, problem is I can still see the pixels, and my desk is quite deep. Do I NEED 4k? No. Would I prefer if I had it? Hell yes, but not enough to spend huge amount of money that are damaging to an already unrealistic market.

[–] BCsven@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 day ago

Does it really help gameplay on the average monitor? If it is a fast paced game Im not even paying attention to pixels