ultrawide vs 4k monitors

[apepi]

It is, however it answers your question and answers it pretty well if I'm honest, lowering some or certain settings will not impact the fidelity much at all but you will gain a lot of performance, mean look at those presets on certain games, like GTA5, medium having triple the frame rate of ultra.

I have to agree with the video that reviewers should include medium settings in their reviews but then again most reviewers aren't gamers, they only know ultra preset is highest (most games it actually isn't highest settings but they don't know games enough for when it comes into play).

I am more thinking about reviews for gpus and not of games themselves.

[Deleted]

I am more thinking about reviews for gpus and not of games themselves.

How else do you test a GPU? I am not talking about reviewing a game it self, but because reviewers don't know the games as they aren't gamers, they don't know the impact of said settings, which would show them if a game has any real impact on the fidelity shown for the performance impact it has.

People will see said game not running at 4K decently for a given GPU when in truth it will run it just fine if you tone down even the preset, they simply don't provide enough information for prospecting buyers.

Games can run at 60 FPS at 4 K at medium - high settings on modern titles, reviewers just don't show that, if a real gamer was reviewing said hardware, they could easily delve into the settings, imo PC gamers explore settings in the option tab more then a tech reviewer, this would give more information and a solid buying guide.

I am curious if most of these linuspaulswittips know what alpha effects even are.

[RuneDK]

Would a 970 even be able to run a 4k decently?

Im future proofing myself. Want a monitor now, get a 1080 or 1080ti later this year, or even wait for the 11xx cards to come sometime next year.

[Docturphil]

If you're getting an ultra wide screen, prepare on having to search for mods for some games as not all games support it.

Not all games, no, but most do. And worse case scenario you'll have black areas on both sides of the screen.

[Sturmbringe]

I own an Acer Predator X34 3440X1440 34 inch monitor.

I also upgraded my old GTX 780TI to a new Palit Gamerock GTX 1080. This specific version of the 1080 is one of the very best versions of the 1080, and it scores an amazing 24300 3D Mark Firestrike score while NOT overvolted.

Comparison with other GPUs here: https://www.futuremark.com/hardware/gpu

So, after I installed the card and finished benchmarking and stress-testing it, first thing I did was to run GTAV at 3440X1440 ULTRA (all settings maxed out).

I got 33-45 FPS with my 4770k@4.5 GHz.

I don't recommend 4K monitors yet for gaming, b/c there isn't a card on the market yet that's powerful enough to run games at 4K ULTRA and get 60FPS steady.

[Antipathy1018]

I have been running 2 Samsung 40 inch 4k TVs as my monitor setup for about 9 months now. First with a 960 FTW and now with a 1070 FTW. With the 960 I could run most games at mid to high settings in 4k and have HD video either streaming or playing off my HD with no issues. Once upgraded to the 1070 I can do all with the games set to ultra. On the plus side it frees me from having to sit at a desk to play, and can instead just sit in a comfortable chair 5-6 feet away.

Long story short why settle for ultrawide or 4k when you can get a widescreen 4k TV or 2 to use as monitors?

[DeltrusDisc]

I'm not settling for Ultrawide: I view it as superior, and yes, I've experienced both, which I doubt you have given your comment.

Hell, even Linus said, I believe last year or the year before that he prefers the ultrawides.