4K Gaming: A Sign of the Future, or Not Entirely Possible?

[bevo]

I'm not really looking forward to 4k. I would rather my GPU power be going towards the game being better than just trying to catch up with some high resolution. I want better software not higher resolution. It would be a shame if developers had to not implement features for a game because they're trying to get the game to run at 4k. For me 1080 or 1440 is fine for a monitor.

With VR though we may need to get up there into really high resolution but for normal gaming I would much rather my power be going toward better AI or better overall graphics.

4k is a huge leep in power needed which I think 90% of people just don't understand. I know it's been repeated on here but it's just to expensive to build a PC to run 4k for most people. I know people say hardware will get cheaper and it will but games will also hopefully get more demanding and better. If devs have to optimize games for 4K its really going to put a hurting on the overall quality of the game released.
Or maybe I'm crazy

 

[carracerptp]

4K will/is coming just like HD:

1. Crappy and very expensive. Only die-hard rich fans and studios.
2. Very expensive still not very usable.
3. Expensive, some basic support, people that must have the best start buying - We are here now.
4. Expensive but enough support exists to not be crazy. Starting to make non-tech people look.
5. The cool thing to have.
6. 4K is now just like 1080P and affordable.
6.5 Right about now 8K starts getting "crappy support"
7. Everything is 4K.
.
.
. 4K is garbage and looks like 720p, 8K is best and will never be topped.

 

[Saidur_Ali]

4K TVs are in a way already garbage compared to say screens used in mobile phones and tablets. For entry level 4K TV, I think you could get one as low as £249 for a 39" in the UK so I think it is getting really affordable. Problem is lack of content to use on these TVs and might be a couple of years yet before it has good support. I imagine it won't be long before 4K replaces 1080p TVs in the market though as I think it will be a easier sell to customers and price is already come down a lot and see already signs of this happening.

 

[Techy]

To be fair, the current consoles aren't the cutting edge of hardware and performance, as is. Can't expect that, either, given that the console's 400 bucks, supposed to last six years and be sold with a profit from launch.

Games like Metal Gear Solid: Ground Zeroes get a whole slew of graphic updates for the PC version, for example. And my GTX 680 (which was released in March 2012) is still powerful enough to match the system recommendations for a PS4 port with increased visual fidelity. A system running a more modern GPU crushes the PS4's/XBone's performance to the point I'd say they're already left behind...

It'll be interesting on what will happen to next-gen consoles in the coming years. 4K gaming is pretty much exclusive to PCs unless Sony and Microsoft are willing to make another console. And as you said, PCs perform much better

 

[Luminis]

4k is a huge leep in power needed which I think 90% of people just don't understand. I know it's been repeated on here but it's just to expensive to build a PC to run 4k for most people. I know people say hardware will get cheaper and it will but games will also hopefully get more demanding and better. If devs have to optimize games for 4K its really going to put a hurting on the overall quality of the game released.
Or maybe I'm crazy

Meh, it's been the same thing with every wide-spread increase in resolution. Going from 1024 x 768 to 1920 x 1080 took a huge amount of processing power, but 1080p gaming has been the norm on PCs for years now.

It'll be interesting on what will happen to next-gen consoles in the coming years.

Nothing, really. The consoles aren't marketed to the crowd that cares that much about the resolution their games are displayed in, I'd say.

Typically, comments on YouTube videos that deal with that sort of stuff will be about PS4 and XBOne owners bickering about who's got the better graphics, until someone mentions PCs. At that point, it's not about graphics anymore but about gameplay That's how things are going to continue.

 

[Joel]

It is no big thing, just need Sony to enable 4K output and I'm sure there will be games that make use of it.

It is a big thing. When you change resolutions your computer or console needs to render those pixels. Even if they could just flip a switch and enable 4k the PS4 is absolutely nowhere near powerful enough to run games at that resolution. Again, currently to run games at 4k at a reasonable frame rate on PC you need to spend $1800 or more on graphics cards, you aren't going to match that power with a $400 console. If they "enabled" 4k, you'd get less than 10fps in games, and the only other way would be if they just rendered at 1080p and blew it up into 4k which would look horrible and defeat the purpose in the first place.

It's not trivial, you're asking fixed hardware to render 4 times as many pixels.

4K TVs are in a way already garbage compared to say screens used in mobile phones and tablets.

What are you talking about? Phones screens are pretty much all at 1080p. 4k is 4 times the pixels, sure, a phone will have higher pixel density but that's not really a failing of a 4k TV because you don't look at it 2 feet away from your face like a phone.

 

[Saidur_Ali]

It is a big thing. When you change resolutions your computer or console needs to render those pixels. Even if they could just flip a switch and enable 4k the PS4 is absolutely nowhere near powerful enough to run games at that resolution. Again, currently to run games at 4k at a reasonable frame rate on PC you need to spend $1800 or more on graphics cards, you aren't going to match that power with a $400 console. If they "enabled" 4k, you'd get less than 10fps in games, and the only other way would be if they just rendered at 1080p and blew it up into 4k which would look horrible and defeat the purpose in the first place.

It's not trivial, you're asking fixed hardware to render 4 times as many pixels.

It's not trivial, I agree when the fixed hardware has the power to render 4 times as many pixels which the PS4 is capable of doing.

You can play games at 4K at reasonable frame rates on PC with only a $329 card.

 

[TenEightyOne]

...when the fixed hardware has the power to render 4 times as many pixels which the PS4 is capable of doing....

Source? And at what kind of FPS-rate?

 

[bevo]

It's not trivial, I agree when the fixed hardware has the power to render 4 times as many pixels which the PS4 is capable of doing.

You can play games at 4K at reasonable frame rates on PC with only a $329 card.

the ps4 can barely play games at 1080p and some games it can't play at 1080p and keep a steady frame rate. Other games aren't even native 1080 on the ps4. I can't imagine the quality of game that would be released on a ps4 if 4k is the resolution the developers were aiming for.

 

[Luminis]

It's not trivial, I agree when the fixed hardware has the power to render 4 times as many pixels which the PS4 is capable of doing.

You wot m8?

The PS4 isn't even powerful enough to run Metal Gear Solid: Ground Zeroes with all the bells and whistles at 1080p.

 

[Saidur_Ali]

Source? And at what kind of FPS-rate?

4K (3840x2160) at 30FPS which is maximum that can be done on HDMI version PS4 has. Here is a game that was 720p 30FPS on PS3 that could do potentially 4K 30FPS if allowed that output: Link

Also look at this persons YouTube videos with a graphics card that is probably weaker than in PS4 running games at 4K: Link

the ps4 can barely play games at 1080p and some games it can't play at 1080p and keep a steady frame rate. Other games aren't even native 1080 on the ps4. I can't imagine the quality of game that would be released on a ps4 if 4k is the resolution the developers were aiming for.

CPU bottleneck is a big problem for these consoles but it something the developers and Sony can also do something about.

 

[TenEightyOne]

4K (3840x2160) at 30FPS which is maximum that can be done on HDMI version PS4 has. Here is a game that was 720p 30FPS on PS3 that could do potentially 4K 30FPS if allowed that output: Link

Also look at this persons YouTube videos with a graphics card that is probably weaker than in PS4 running games at 4K: Link

No, I'm sorry, I'm not interested in a graphics card that is "probably" anything, I'd like a source that shows that a PS4 is capable of 4K. In fact, given what you've just said, I'd hope it says the PS4 is capable of 4K at 30fps.

EDIT: I have a very old microwave oven. It's fair to say that it could output 4K at 30fps if allowed that output. Which I don't expect, it can barely boil milk.

 

[Joel]

It's not trivial, I agree when the fixed hardware has the power to render 4 times as many pixels which the PS4 is capable of doing.

You can play games at 4K at reasonable frame rates on PC with only a $329 card.

The PS4 and XB1 have trouble running games at 1080p. They can't just magically render 4x the pixels because Sony said so.

 

[Saidur_Ali]

No, I'm sorry, I'm not interested in a graphics card that is "probably" anything, I'd like a source that shows that a PS4 is capable of 4K. In fact, given what you've just said, I'd hope it says the PS4 is capable of 4K at 30fps.

EDIT: I have a very old microwave oven. It's fair to say that it could output 4K at 30fps if allowed that output. Which I don't expect, it can barely boil milk.

So I guess you didn't read article.

The PS4 and XB1 have trouble running games at 1080p. They can't just magically render 4x the pixels because Sony said so.

A developer is saying PS4 could do it.

 

[Luminis]

A developer is saying PS4 could do it.

The PS4 might be able to output a video signal at 4k/30FPS, but that's a far cry from rendering anythi´ng resembling a modern video game at that resolution and framerate.

A German gaming magazine ran Skyrim at 4K. Doing so required a Radeon 7970 Toxic, which itself has more processing power than the PS4 as a whole system. Skyrim used 3,5GB of VRAM, by the way.

/edit: Had to check the PS4's hardware to make sure, but it doesn't even have enough VRAM to load the 4K textures of Skyrim.

 

[TenEightyOne]

So I guess you didn't read article.

Trine 2 could even hit 4K at 30fps should Sony ever unlock the output of the PS4 to support ultra-HD resolution.

Could isn't can. My car could hit 200mph if I ever unlock the output of a new engine, gearbox and shell.

A developer is saying PS4 could do it.

Source? You said previously that it was something the PS4 "is capable of doing", so far you've shown a source that says it could if the potential was unlocked. To my mind that's not the same thing at all.

 

[Joel]

So I guess you didn't read article.

I did read it. Did you watch the video? They're talking about Trine 2, which while it looks good isn't a very demanding game. I'm sure the PS4 could run Angry Birds at 4k but that's not really what we're talking about here.

I'm also highly skeptical of the 750ti running Sleeping Dogs at 60fps/4k. Most reviews I've read have the card at ~50fps at 1080p.

 

[Luminis]

Sony's marketing department's gotta be one of the best in the world, really.

The amount of people who're believing that the PS4 can do 4K and outperform computers with multiple times the processing power because of [reasons] is astonishing.

 

[BobK]

4k is a huge leep in power needed which I think 90% of people just don't understand.

And bigger leaps have been made in the past, and it was no big deal. That's what you aren't understanding.

I know it's been repeated on here but it's just to expensive to build a PC to run 4k for most people.

This week, yes. Wait until next week.

I know people say hardware will get cheaper and it will but games will also hopefully get more demanding and better.

Just like they always have in the past.

If devs have to optimize games for 4K its really going to put a hurting on the overall quality of the game released.

Again, it hasn't in the past; what makes you think this iteration is any different?

Or maybe I'm crazy

QFT

 

[TenEightyOne]

The amount of people who're believing that the PS4 can do 4K and outperform computers with multiple times the processing power because of [reasons] is astonishing.

Tl;dr because master-race denier etc. etc.

Where has this idea actually come from? I've seen it growing a little across the internetses. There must be some source that's made people think this? I'd love a go at that source

 

[Saidur_Ali]

Could isn't can. My car could hit 200mph if I ever unlock the output of a new engine, gearbox and shell.



Source? You said previously that it was something the PS4 "is capable of doing", so far you've shown a source that says it could if the potential was unlocked. To my mind that's not the same thing at all.

It is a bit like the Japanese R35 GTR can do more than 111mph outside of race tracks simply by getting rid of the software limit. PS4 need to allow 4K output in order to allow developers to enable 4K output on PS4 games. Simple, the hardware is capable of having games at resolution, it is not adding a new engine, gearbox or shell but enabling what is already there.

Another thing but this time game related could be Xbox One launch consoles can't play any games unless you update it or for example 3D Blu-Ray like both Xbox One and PS4 only possible after a certain update. Similar way Sony have to enable it 4K output.

I did read it. Did you watch the video? They're talking about Trine 2, which while it looks good isn't a very demanding game. I'm sure the PS4 could run Angry Birds at 4k but that's not really what we're talking about.

The reading part wasn't addressed to you. It is quite demanding given on previous consoles it could only run at 720P 30FPS. At least we are getting to point where from before you think games can't run at 4K at playable frame rates on consoles to can. Now look for example a cheap (Less than $140) and potentially weaker GPU than PS4 running games at 4K on YouTube for example from link in one of my previous posts on this page.

Sony's marketing department's gotta be one of the best in the world, really.

The amount of people who're believing that the PS4 can do 4K and outperform computers with multiple times the processing power because of [reasons] is astonishing.

Don't see where Sony are doing that or people saying that in the way I think you are suggesting unless you are talking about people like misterXmedia and their small number of fans but that happens with any product.

 

[Luminis]

Dunno where it comes from. I entered "PS4 4K" into Google, and the first result is an article on Forbes, named "The PS4 and Xbox One Are Already Out Of Date".

Gaming forums are full of scathing comments from PS4 fan boys about how the Xbox One delivering a number of its games with resolutions a few lines less than 1080 proves Microsoft Microsoft’s console is rubbish. Even the editorial sections of most gaming sites have fallen prey to navel gazing and technical over-analysis on the same subject.
What every single person who gets caught up in these hilariously petty arguments fails to recognise is that actually the PS4 and Xbox One are both past their sell by dates. In fact, they’ve been living on borrowed time from the very day they launched. Why? Because neither of them truly support 4K.

It's beyond me how someone's able to read up on the subject and not be instantly informed about the PS4's/XBOne's inability to run 4K games properly.

Simple, the hardware is capable of having games at resolution

Except that it is not.

It doesn't have the GPU, it doesn't have the CPU, it doesn't have the VRAM to run anything that's even close to a current generation game in 4K. Case in point: The PS4 couldn't handle Skyrim in 4K. and that's a game from 2011.

Can we please put the whole "the PS4 can do 4K gaming!" nonsense to rest? Please?!

 

[TenEightyOne]

...similar way Sony have to enable it 4K output.

To be clear... you say that the PS4 is natively capable of 4K. I presume that it's 4K at 30fps, the standard that gamers generally require as a minimum (in my opinion).

The PS4 blatantly isn't capable of that performance in its current form so you're implying that somehow Sony have choked it?

Source required.

 

[Saidur_Ali]

Except that it is not.

It doesn't have the GPU, it doesn't have the CPU, it doesn't have the VRAM to run anything that's even close to a current generation game in 4K. Case in point: The PS4 couldn't handle Skyrim in 4K. and that's a game from 2011.

Can we please put the whole "the PS4 can do 4K gaming!" nonsense to rest? Please?!

Interesting that you bring up VRAM, PS4 has really fast and large amount of unified memory so that is a strong point compared to a lot of gaming PC systems.

Why is it nonsense?

To be clear... you say that the PS4 is natively capable of 4K. I presume that it's 4K at 30fps, the standard that gamers generally require as a minimum (in my opinion).

The PS4 blatantly isn't capable of that performance in its current form so you're implying that somehow Sony have choked it?

Source required.

Yes and a developers senior graphics programmer suggested this and I'm sure they know a lot about the systems graphical capabilities given their job title and have helped develop a game on that platform.

The thing Sony have done is not allow 4K output in firmware as mentioned in that Eurogamer article.

 

[TenEightyOne]

Yes and a developers senior graphics programmer suggested this and I'm sure they know a lot about the systems graphical capabilities given their job title and have helped develop a game on that platform.

If I say "source required" one more time I'm going to have an emergency crew from HP all over me.

For the record I have no doubt about Sony's knowledge about the PS4's graphical capabilities, I'm more worried about yours. How did you acquire that knowledge? (Hint: at sauce)

 

[Saidur_Ali]

If I say "source required" one more time I'm going to have an emergency crew from HP all over me.

For the record I have no doubt about Sony's knowledge about the PS4's graphical capabilities, I'm more worried about yours. How did you acquire that knowledge? (Hint: at sauce)

Where is there anything mentioning about Sony's knowledge about PS4's graphical capabilities? Source required.

 

[bevo]

And bigger leaps have been made in the past, and it was no big deal. That's what you aren't understanding.


This week, yes. Wait until next week.


Just like they always have in the past.



Again, it hasn't in the past; what makes you think this iteration is any different?


QFT

We have never jumped as high as going from 1080 to 2180 in one step in resolution. We went from 480 to 600 to 720 to 1080. All small steps each time as standards that most people played PC games at. Going from 1920x1080 to 4096x2160 will be a much larger leap than any in the past. I know there are resolutions in between 1080 and 4k but most people are on a 1080 screen. The amount of power they need to make the jump from 1920 to 4k is huge. Avid PC gamers will be different who have setups for triple or high res monitor but that's a small percentage of gamers. The gamers who think they can just go out and buy a 4k monitor and use their current PC that their pushing a 1920 monitor with will be upset.

Maybe nvidia will come up with tech to drive them easier somehow or start putting out gsync monitors at a better price to help with lower and fluctuating frame rates.

4k will get here. But right now the hardware costs big money to run it and there would be no reason for a developer to optimize games toward it until the hardware is affordable for the consumer.

Honestly I hope 4k power gets here fast. I'm on the VR bandwagon and would love to see a 4k rift but I hope the first consumer one isn't 4k. I would rather see 1440 so more people can enjoy it.

I just think 4k is a lot to ask of the average PC gamer to try and push. I actually believe the future of gaming is in VR. I don't think 4k will be a resolution we see with it. I imagine we will see something else specific just for VR headsets once they stop using cell phone screens.

 

[TenEightyOne]

Where is there anything mentioning about Sony's knowledge about PS4's graphical capabilities? Source required.

Oh, I'm shot!

...when the fixed hardware has the power to render 4 times as many pixels which the PS4 is capable of doing....

Only kidding

Source required.

 

[Luminis]

Interesting that you bring up VRAM, PS4 has really fast and large amount of unified memory so that is a strong point compared to a lot of gaming PC systems.

8GB of unified RAM isn't a strong point if we're talking about a game that needs half of that for its textures alone. There's 4,5 GB of RAM left to run the PS4's OS and, oh, I dunno, the game itself? If we're comparing the PS4 to PCs build to run games at 4K... Well, those typically run some 8 to 12 GB of GDDR5 VRAM (double or tripple GTX970s, for example) plus some 12 to 16 GB of RAM.

Plus, the speed of the VRAM won't do the PS4 any good. The CPU/GPU doesn't have anywhere near the throughput to supply the VRAM with the required data.

Why is it nonsense?

The PS4, as a system, manages to push about 1.8 TFLOPS of processing power. A stock GTX680 alone is pushing 3.1 TFLOPS, that's excluding the processing power the CPU develops and not including anything you're getting from overclocking. All in all, my rig's likely capable of delivering twice the processing power of the PS4, if not more. And my computer can't hope to run recent games in 4K.

The GTX980, which is far closer to being a 4k-ready GPU is pushing 5 TFLOPS of processing power. Three times of what the PS4 is capable of on the GPU alone. You need a GPU three times as powerful as the PS4 to start tinkering with recent games in 4K and you're really asking why 4K gaming on the PS4 is nonsense?

/edit:
Let's make this a bit simpler, shall we? Sony's selling 4K TVs. They're supporting the format. Why on earth would they limit the PS4 to 1080p if it was capable of 4K? And if the PS4 was capable of 4K at 30 FPS, why are devlopers struggling to keep stable framerates at 1080? 1080/60 should be a cakewalk - if the PS4 was anywhere near as powerful as you seem to believe.

 

[Tornado]

I always love when you try to be as polite as possible in mocking a ridiculous viewpoint, and then the exact person to originally express it decides to throw his hat in the ring and make the whole effort pointless.