Will my pc run 4k?

[tango777]

cpu, 13700
mb,msi z690
gpu,7900xt 20gb
ram,32gb@6600
windows 11

[tango777]

what kind of fps (average lets say)

[tango777]

Lets say BF2042, planet coaster and farcry 6.

[Rumpelcrutchskin]

You can find plenty of 7900 XT benchmarks for various games on YouTube.

[tango777]

Think maybe a 7900xtx for a little more future.

[C1REX]

Αναρτήθηκε αρχικά από tango777:

cpu, 13700
mb,msi z690
gpu,7900xt 20gb
ram,32gb@6600
windows 11

It's OK for older games but not even the 4090 can run some of the newest games at native 4K60fps.

On the bright side the FSR is getting a lot better in recent games so you can turn it on and in most cases have around 1440p performance but at a nearly native 4K quality. Check Ghost of Tsushima and how good the upscaling and performance is in that game.

Due to a huge improvements to DLSS, FSR, TSR I think 4K is the best resolution anyway regardless of your GPU performance.

Some people may argue that native is always better but that is true only for 4K vs 4K + FSR and not 4K+FSR vs native 1440p. Same as 1440p + FSR looks better than native 960p it upscales from.

[Dutchgamer1982]

bottleneck with that cpu is minimal 0.7% and can be ignored

an 7900XT can run 4k at about 80fps at ultra settings.

personally I not like anything below 100fps... and would switch to 1440p instead
but... as a general rule.. only below 60fps is truelly unplayable.

so set a few settings a bit lower than ultra or accept 80fps.. and yes it can run 4k

[_I_]

the igpu can output 4k through hdmi
but not hold good fps in games

7900xt can do much better, but imho, save 4k for movies or other stuff
games are still better at 1440p, but make sure the display is 144+hz and supports freesync
sot he gpu can lower refresh to match its output

[Bad 💀 Motha]

No point in playing at 4K unless you simply are going through that for presentation, recording purposes or for higher res screenshots.

Actual gameplay would be far much better at 1440p 16:9 or 21:9 @ 120+ Hz

1440p/240Hz is a really good sweet spot and good Monitors for this have come down in pricing quite a bit in recent year or so.

Most of the games at 4K on any AMD GPU is only maybe going to hit 30-60 range at best, which is complete rubbish for a PC that costs that much. And with the lack of DLSS option (since FSR is completely useless since it looks awful) you would not have a good method of gaining FPS at 4K, except from turning down in-game visual settings, which basically defeats the whole purpose of even playing at 4K.

Where as the same GPU compared with same games and settings could easily run those games at 1440p at around 80-200 FPS or so. And that's without enabling crap like FSR.

[C1REX]

Αναρτήθηκε αρχικά από SNX986X:

Stop spreading misinformation.

+1

With modern games you can just add upscaling that looks nearly as good as native and sometimes even better. Then add frame gen and take advantage of 4K144hz screens. Frame gen is trash in competitive games but great for single player games.

People even use upscaling at 1440p but nobody would ever dare to say that native 960p is better. But somehow native 1440p is better than 4K + DLSS/FSR/TSR. Well, no it’s not. Upscaling actually works best at 4K.

[Dutchgamer1982]

Αναρτήθηκε αρχικά από C1REX:

Αναρτήθηκε αρχικά από SNX986X:

Stop spreading misinformation.

+1

With modern games you can just add upscaling that looks nearly as good as native and sometimes even better. Then add frame gen and take advantage of 4K144hz screens. Frame gen is trash in competitive games but great for single player games.

People even use upscaling at 1440p but nobody would ever dare to say that native 960p is better. But somehow native 1440p is better than 4K + DLSS/FSR/TSR. Well, no it’s not. Upscaling actually works best at 4K.

upscaling is trash.

you use raw power.

but I also am of the opinion that going 4k is pointless without a 40 inch screen.
the ONLy advantage in gaming of a higher resolution is : battlefield oversight"
if your screen is to small aka pixeldense any of that goes lost...
visually you cannot see the difference of 1440p and 4k on a 27 inch screen..

so all you are doing is giving yourself LESS fps (which you CAN see when under 100fps)
without any gains.

thats why 4k only makes sence if you also buy the 2000 euro 44 oled, 120+hz, freesync, 0.1ms responcetime 16:9 screens that it is should be depicted on.

if you aint got that kind of money to use on a pc minitor capable to display 4k properly pointless to run 4k.

4k : needs a 2000 euro monitor..

cards suited for 4k :
4090 : only card that CAN run 100+fps

cards able to run 4k (more than 60fps) but can better used 1440p (less than 100fps in 4k)
80-99 fps :
RX 7900 XTX
RTX 4080 Super
RTX 4080
RX 7900 XT
60-79 fps :
RTX 4070 ti Super
RTX 3090 ti
RTX 4070 ti
RTX 3090
RX 7900 GRE
RTX 3080 ti
RX 6950 XT
RTX 4070 Super
RX 7800 XT
RTX 3080
RX 6900 XT

a RTX 4070 and lower
a RX 7700 XT and lower
an RTX 3070 ti and lower
an RX 6800 XT and lower
and all cards in RTX 2000 series and lower
and all cards in RX 5000 series and lower
are NOT able to run 4k in any playbale fps at all.

so there IS a long list of cards that COULD run 4k...
but exept the 4090.. non of them SHOULD...

I also really doubt that many people have the proper 2000 euro 44 inch monitor to display 4k.

[_I_]

display upscaling trashes the quality of the image

newer methods do better, but still not nearly as good as the gpu drawing at the displays native res

it is a tradeoff to get higher fps at higher res

but imho, 1440p is easier res to hit and hold 120+fps
with a high end gpu if the cpu can keep up

Αναρτήθηκε αρχικά από SNX986X:

i HAVE A 27" 4k & 1440P monitor, the 4k is better but it's not a big difference, the 1440P monitors I have are faster screens anyway, 1 165hz and the other 170hz, way cheaper than buying a 4K 144hz or more and my 7900 XT runs every game without a hiutch at that res, it's overkill.

a monitor cannot be both 4k and 1440p, the panel is either one or the other
it may be a 1440 panel, that its main board can downscale the 4k image to 1440p
27 is way too small for a 4k display anyway, pixels would be the same size as a 13.5in 1080p laptop display

[Dutchgamer1982]

Αναρτήθηκε αρχικά από SNX986X:

Αναρτήθηκε αρχικά από _I_:

display upscaling trashes the quality of the image

newer methods do better, but still not nearly as good as the gpu drawing at the displays native res

it is a tradeoff to get higher fps at higher res

but imho, 1440p is easier res to hit and hold 120+fps
with a high end gpu if the cpu can keep up




a monitor cannot be both 4k and 1440p, the panel is either one or the other
it may be a 1440 panel, that its main board can downscale the 4k image to 1440p
27 is way too small for a 4k display anyway, pixels would be the same size as a 13.5in 1080p laptop display

I have 1 4K, 2 1440P.


The 4K is 60hz and TN, but 4K does deliver a sharper image than 1440P IPS or VA at 27" it's just not a big difference.


You need a huge screen by which point you may aswell use your desktop computer as a home theatre PC as you will be too close to the screen to be comfortable playing.

At 27" I have to push the screen back so the screen is overall smaller and I get all of the screen within the sweet spot of peripheral vision for games like CS. I wish they still made 21" screens but with 1440P.. anyhow...

4K has a huge increase in GPU demand vs the small difference between 4K and 1440P.

I think it's bes to point that out rather than saying it's straight up no difference at 27", this is false.

I hate TN and VA screens.

but yeah not all IPS are equal in quality thats why even 27 inch 1440p ips start at 150 euro but can go upto 1000 euro...

mine is on the high end of that.. and thus very very sharp and colourtrue..

if you take an TN 4k screen it looks trash compared to it.
and until recently ips 4k screen not went higher than 60fps.
and yeah I can clearly see the difference between 60fps and 100fps.
I will feel much more tired watching at 60fps long.. unpleasant to the eyes.. and motionsicknes get worse etc.
100fps and 120fps.. not so much.

as I play a lot of strategy.. games if your units get to small.. thats detrimental... and higher rez does scale everything smaller..

I ofcourse always only use TRUE rendering..

I have waited with 4k until the screens catched up.
now they finally have..

40 inch minimal. - since 2022 this excists
same quality screen - OLED is vastly better than ips
1ms or faster - 0.5 or even 0.1 ms
freesync and gsync - since 2023 this also is added
16:9 : since 2022 yes.. before many 4k screens had useless widescreen which is not usefull as a strategy gamer.. you want more in your field of vieuw... having things outside your direct view while top of your vieuw has no screen in it.. is useless.

[Dutchgamer1982]

imho if you want to run 4k only 3 monitors in the market are suited :

LG UltraGear 48GQ900 (1400 euro)
ASUS ROG Swift OLED PG48UQ (1600 euro)

and the discontinued,
Alienware AW5520QF (which used to sell for 5500 euro)

those are the only ones that have all the features you will want.

ofcourse ideally you also need an 4090.. to be able to run 100+fps.. as thats the only card capable doing so..
perhaps with the 5xxx series we get more options.>

and amd already decleared their next series of radeon won't have flagship models expect nvdia to pricegauch even more though.. no competition after all..

[C1REX]

I’ve upgraded to 2x 4K screens and for me there are just benefits.
Upscaling at 4K is like magic and it looks almost like real 4K with the performance of 1440p settings.

It can also run any resolution, what means I can use dynamic resolution what is an uber trash on 1440p and 1080p screens.

Consoles look best on a 4K screen even if they rarely do native 4K.

[Dutchgamer1982]

Αναρτήθηκε αρχικά από C1REX:

I’ve upgraded to 2x 4K screens and for me there are just benefits.
Upscaling at 4K is like magic and it looks almost like real 4K with the performance of 1440p settings.

It can also run any resolution, what means I can use dynamic resolution what is an uber trash on 1440p and 1080p screens.

Consoles look best on a 4K screen even if they rarely do native 4K.

are you cursing? consoles to me belong in the trash.
-> no serious gamer ever gets near those things.
but if thats your cup of tea.. yea no wonder your satisfied with 60 fps.. consoles don't even go higher.

and I just really really hate upscaling... it is like a person driving a volvo with a ferari kit on the outsite.. lame..

buy a real ferrari or own up to owning a volvo.