wccftech presents how to waste money

[mackerel]

If we take 60 fps as an adequacy point, then with the GPU more limiting at 4k I could almost accept it, but still wouldn't recommend it.

I don't see how that would work in VR though, unless you're thinking about applying significantly extra processing effects beyond defaults?

 

[Tír na nÓg]

^Because 2160*1200 pixels@90Hz is not far from 3840*2160@60Hz ion terms of output needed, as you need to apply AA on the Oculus and not on the 4K screen.

exemple: Dirt Rally.

My 1080ti gives a bit more than FPS maxed out@4K, and is on the edge to keep 90FPS constant (as soon as I apply 1.2+ supersampling, I have Frame loss).

 

[mackerel]

I'd argue about the need for AA at 4k... I'd say it is more a function of the pixel density. As a rough guide, if you can still resolve pixels by eye, you still need AA. Similar arguments may be found on photography forums, where some claim higher resolutions negate the need for AA on sensors, yet anyone with even a basic understanding of sampling theory will know that can't be said in itself. So without making allowance for AA, the VR numbers above don't even come close to 4k60, at 233MP/s vs 498MP/s respectively. Not even half. At 1.2x SS I make that only going up to 336MP/s. 1440p60 would come at 221MP/s.

At a really abstract level, you could argue if you need to push a lot of pixels, you tend towards being GPU limited. If you want higher framerates, you tend towards being CPU limited. I think the reality is in most systems, we're in that mid ground where both still have a significant influence. Makes sense for games companies to try to balance the use of both. Maybe the CPU bar to reach 60fps minimum is lower than I think.


Edit:

All this talk has reminded me of a gripe I had. When I tried to buy a gaming laptop, I was annoyed they put all the budget in the CPU, and not enough in the GPU. My current personal laptop has a 6700HQ and 970M in it, and I would have preferred a 980M with a lower quad core (with or without HT) but no one offered that at the time.

 

[Kenrou]

I'd argue about the need for AA at 4k... I'd say it is more a function of the pixel density. As a rough guide, if you can still resolve pixels by eye, you still need AA.

Really depends on the game, good example is Mass Effect 3. Only way to play the damned thing on a PC is 4K with 4xMSAA (4xSGSSAA+4xMSAA at 1080p) and even then you can still see jaggies in the distance. Tis what you get with console ports and bad programming... Fast forward to a newer more well programmed game like CoD AW/Titanfall 2 and even at 1080p CMAA you rarely see jaggies.

 

[Tír na nÓg]

I'd argue about the need for AA at 4k... I'd say it is more a function of the pixel density. As a rough guide, if you can still resolve pixels by eye, you still need AA. Similar arguments may be found on photography forums, where some claim higher resolutions negate the need for AA on sensors, yet anyone with even a basic understanding of sampling theory will know that can't be said in itself. So without making allowance for AA, the VR numbers above don't even come close to 4k60, at 233MP/s vs 498MP/s respectively. Not even half. At 1.2x SS I make that only going up to 336MP/s. 1440p60 would come at 221MP/s.

At a really abstract level, you could argue if you need to push a lot of pixels, you tend towards being GPU limited. If you want higher framerates, you tend towards being CPU limited. I think the reality is in most systems, we're in that mid ground where both still have a significant influence. Makes sense for games companies to try to balance the use of both. Maybe the CPU bar to reach 60fps minimum is lower than I think.


Edit:

All this talk has reminded me of a gripe I had. When I tried to buy a gaming laptop, I was annoyed they put all the budget in the CPU, and not enough in the GPU. My current personal laptop has a 6700HQ and 970M in it, and I would have preferred a 980M with a lower quad core (with or without HT) but no one offered that at the time.

28" 4k@50cm is retina (retina cells density is lower than pixels projected density). So no need of AA.