4K resolution?

  • Thread starter urbanite9
  • 171 comments
  • 10,122 views
I dont want it to happen, and I dont think it will. I want 1080ps 60fps, and I think that is what I will get. Your perspective of the argument seems to be mostly wrong.

What the flying pig is 1080ps?

. A PS4 can do more than 3 titan cards in SLI in the right optimisation environment.

3298.jpg
 
Last edited:
I dont want it to happen, and I dont think it will. I want 1080ps 60fps, and I think that is what I will get. Your perspective of the argument seems to be mostly wrong.

I like how you just totally ignore points in posts you don't want to answer.
 
....and when do you think we'll have a graphics card to power 8K games? 20 years, maybe? I'm pretty sure we'll get to the stage where high levels of AA are much more manageable than 8k and no AA required.

With Moore's law and all, I don't think it'll take 20 years.

And as I said, it doesn't matter how much AA you apply. Thin objects such as powerlines are never going to look right on low-res displays. The pixels are simply too big to display things that thin. Antialaisng helps with the jaggies and helps them appear without as many noticable gaps, but it also makes them blurry.
 
Yaywalter
With Moore's law and all, I don't think it'll take 20 years.

And as I said, it doesn't matter how much AA you apply. Thin objects such as powerlines are never going to look right on low-res displays. The pixels are simply too big to display things that thin. Antialaisng helps with the jaggies and helps them appear without as many noticable gaps, but it also makes them blurry.

I don't know about that, when I watch a 1080p blu-ray things like powerlines and fences look fine. In fact high quality tv broadcasts at lower resolutions don't leave you thinking that things like hair or grass and whatnot need higher resolution to be displayed properly. What I'm saying is that it's not the resolution that makes things look wrong or flickery or broken, although it can make those faults seem worse.
 
I dont want it to happen, and I dont think it will. I want 1080ps 60fps, and I think that is what I will get. Your perspective of the argument seems to be mostly wrong.

Well at least my arguments are based in facts and not in what I want.

Sorry but how old are you? Because this whole debate is getting silly with each post.

If you are trying to "troll" people here, this is not the place.
 
Anti-aliasing isn't the best way to combat aliasing, especially on super-thin details like power lines or fences which just get turned into blurry antialiasing smudgefests.

With Moore's law and all, I don't think it'll take 20 years.

And as I said, it doesn't matter how much AA you apply. Thin objects such as powerlines are never going to look right on low-res displays. The pixels are simply too big to display things that thin. Antialaisng helps with the jaggies and helps them appear without as many noticable gaps, but it also makes them blurry.

As you said? Got more than one account have we?
 
For decent-looking games at playable frame-rates, the PS4's hardware will never be able to render anything above 1080p. It simply isn't powerful enough for anything even close to 4K, and honestly, that's not all that much of an issue.

In fact, the most that its graphics hardware can physically output through the display connectors is 2560x1600. So don't bother even arguing about this; the rendering technology is not yet available, the display technologies are not yet widespread enough to make it feasible, and anyone who says that the PS4 is powerful to handle a graphically intensive or "realistic" game at a resolution even close to 4K is a complete idiot.

Don't bother embarrassing yourselves with psuedo-intellectual techno-babble in front of people who actually know what they're talking about.

And don't ever compare the PS4's GPU to a GTX Titan.
 
For decent-looking games at playable frame-rates, the PS4's hardware will never be able to render anything above 1080p. It simply isn't powerful enough for anything even close to 4K, and honestly, that's not all that much of an issue.

In fact, the most that its graphics hardware can physically output through the display connectors is 2560x1600. So don't bother even arguing about this; the rendering technology is not yet available, the display technologies are not yet widespread enough to make it feasible, and anyone who says that the PS4 is powerful to handle a graphically intensive or "realistic" game at a resolution even close to 4K is a complete idiot.

Don't bother embarrassing yourselves with psuedo-intellectual techno-babble in front of people who actually know what they're talking about.

And don't ever compare the PS4's GPU to a GTX Titan.
You say PS4 is fixed at 2560x1600. But the PS3 does 3840x2160.
Are you quite sure of yourself?
My comments are based on logic, yours are just silly. Better for you to just shut up.
 
You say PS4 is fixed at 2560x1600. But the PS3 does 3840x2160.

You keep saying this without providing any evidence. I hope it isn't this:

http://kotaku.com/5093592/gran-turismo-5-prologue-running-at-240-fps--3840x2160-resolution

Because as the article states, that was four PS3s each outputting 1080p.

In fact you've made several claims throughout this thread that you have failed to back up with any facts or evidence. Yet somehow it's other people that have "silly" comments.
 
Last edited:
Why is this topic even here? Whether 4K games will be possible on the PS4 or not at any point in time, GT6 is on the PS3 and won't ever have a higher resolution than 1080p (with one console at least).
 
You say PS4 is fixed at 2560x1600. But the PS3 does 3840x2160.
Are you quite sure of yourself?
My comments are based on logic, yours are just silly. Better for you to just shut up.

A single PS3 cannot output 3840x2160 without severe frame stutter (and given it's G71-based GPU that's being extremely generous), that's one thing. Secondly, your remark about the PS4 being capable of more than 3 Titans in the right optimization environment is so incredibly devoid of anything based in reality I'm convinced you have no idea what the Kepler architecture is.

So, no, your comments aren't based on logic. Far from it in fact. I think it'd be better for you to shut up at this point as you're just coming across as an utter fool.
 
Have you checked his IP by any chance? I've a feeling he may be an old member.
ReincarnationB?

You say PS4 is fixed at 2560x1600. But the PS3 does 3840x2160.
Are you quite sure of yourself?
My comments are based on logic, yours are just silly. Better for you to just shut up.
It's funny that you say this, yet to this point you still haven't provided proof of anything you've said. How is a PS4 more powerful than 3 nVidia Titans? What demo showed GT6 4k@60fps that has any relevance to the PS4? What on PS3 shows that the system can do 4k gaming output?


"Because your perspective is wrong" isn't a rebuttal, by the way.
 
Last edited:
As you said? Got more than one account have we?

Hey, it's not my fault that my ForzaPlanet forum account got migrated to GTPlanet and that I accidentally logged into it because my GTP account used to be named Yaywalter.
 
Hey, it's not my fault that my ForzaPlanet forum account got migrated to GTPlanet and that I accidentally logged into it because my GTP account used to be named Yaywalter.

If you accidentally do something whose fault is it? Lol.
 
Back