you upgrade now goyim

>>714674592 (OP)
>4k
>it's actually just 1080p but upscaled

i already have 4k . i dont need more

>>714674592 (OP)
I've been using 4k since 2017

poorfag thread

Bro I don't even have 1440p yet

>>714676028
Uhhh actually, my PC cost $3000 like a decade ago therefore I am not a poorfag. I just don't care about upgrading now because all I do nowadays is call you tards faggots

Well I recently bought 64gb ram because I wanted to even though I don't meed it.

>>714674592 (OP)
No such thing as a 4K card.

>>714676263
The Switch 2's GPU can do 4K

>>714676580
And my cock can do your mom but I won't.

>>714674592 (OP)
THE CHAMPION JUST RELEASED, GET IT NAO
>https://www.techpowerup.com/review/gigabyte-geforce-rtx-5050-gaming-oc/

>>714676708
ok i'll enjoy my $500 4K machine while your $2000 PC can't even do 1080p right :)

>>714676028
and you're in it

>>714676768
All that graph is telling me is that there is absolutely 0 reason to have anything higher than a 3060

>>714676826
switch 2 better than rtx 5080 confirmed

im not poor. nor am i rich. make over 100k a year.
4k doesnt impress me. going from standard def to 1080p impressed me.
the jump isnt as obvious. diminishing returns.
i may one day move to 1440p but i simply cannot bring myself to give a shit about 4k.
it costs too much in resources for very very little gain. kinda seems pointless.
of course shills hate this. they always want me to buy more crap i dont need. always the same garbage, 'hurr durr youre poor' or 'get your eyes checked 4k is amazing'. but i have money and its just not very impressive. it doesnt 'Wow' me like going from standard to 1080 did.

>>714676028
its not even about being poor.
if you are just patient, do the research, and wait around on places like ebay (again, do the research) you will snag a card for a great price.
I know a dude that found a 3060 being sold by some kids mother while he was being sent off to bootcamp for less than $300.
full serial numbers and video of it working, too.

What would I even play with it.
I actually bought a top of the line CPU but can't be bothered to finish the build.
AAA games are getting gayer and gayer, I don't see that trend stopping any time soon.
if VR was taking off I'd consider that worth.

>>714677435
>>714677624
both of these sum it up nicely. Modern gaming is a massive resource hog that only enables me to see ugly gay shit at barely noticable higher resolutions.
Whats the fucking point of this?

I got a 4k tv a couple years back and just got a 5090 but honestly it feels sort of pointless because I mostly just play old games anyway. Its nice to play elden ring maxed out I guess? Idk.

>>714674592 (OP)
I'm too busy complaining that my last gen card is still great because gen to gen improvements have slowed down. My card lasting longer is a bad thing and I'm very offended for some reason. NGREEEDIA REEEEE.

>>714674592 (OP)
Should I just get a 4k TV for my 4080 desktop? My desk has been overtaken by my laptop for work.

>>714679117
>4080
cuck

>>714674592 (OP)
Yes I did upgrade now after 7 years. I love my new PC

>>714677435
when you decide to make the jump, go for 4k. The visual jump from 1080p to 1400p is noticable, but not as much as 1080p -> 4k, which is imo a huge improvement. It's just like framerates, going from 60 to 80 fps is nice, but going from 60 to 140 is a night and day difference

>>714674592 (OP)
Just bought a new rig. Gonna live with integrated graphics for some months until the super refresh is announced, so I'll decide which way to go with

>>714677435
I went from 1080p, to 4k, to 1440p, then back to 4k. The ultimate strength of 4k is how much better anti-aliasing is with it, which is quite nice as more and more games have shitty AA methods that make them look greasy and smeared on 1080p, or dithered hell on 1440p. 4k doesn't have this issue, but is still too costly to be worth it. The ultimate downside of going 4k is that going to anything else just feels bad afterwards, so you get roped into paypigging for new expensive hardware.
I too was not that impressed with 4k over 1080; it didn't look that much better, just made 1080p look significantly worse once I adjusted to it. Thought 1440 would be a good compromise, but it wasn't. Still, 4k is really nice with older games and supersampling.

>>714680393
That and 1080p scales better to 4k and vice-versa. 1440p is kind of an ugly middle child when it comes to scaling. It'll still work because it has the same aspect ratio, but some things are gonna be blurry or odd looking.

>>714680305
specs ?

>>714676028
how do i get rich

Thanks but I think I’m playing HOMM3 again

I will probably run 1080p for another decade 2bh

>>714676580
What're you gonna play in 4k on that lol. The original Mario?

>>714682820
Ryzen 7 9800X3D, RTX 5080, 64 GigachadB Ram

>>714683343
>64 GigachadB Ram
DDR4 or DDR5?

>>714683415
Kingston Furry Beast so DDR5

>>714684147
good job. there still exist retards who think 16GB ram is enough. imo 32 is the least anyone should get but 64 feels so good
t. 64GB enjoyer

>>714684389
Based. Most people were telling me no one needs 64 GB but I thought why the hell not and I'm happy with it

>>714674592 (OP)
Reminder that unless you have the following:
>1440p or higher resoution monitor
>RTX3080, equivalent or better graphics card
>Ryzen 5600, equivalent or better processor
>at least one (1) SSD in your system
your opinions on graphics/hardware/optimizations are irrelevant, because your frustration and denial over having lacklustre hardware is affecting your judgement.

Especially you dumbasses trying to play new graphically heavy games at 1080p and complaining. That's a resolution over two decades old now, you're the equivalent of people still riding carriages screeching in the street about how internal combustion engines and electricity are jewish schemes that don't work.

>>714677435
this post reminded me of shopping for TVs when HD was becoming the norm around 2008, everything was mindblowingly clear on the display of displays. i went a couple of years ago and it looked just as high def as my current 1080p setup

>>714684817
if you can afford it then why not

>>714674592 (OP)
still rocking 720p LED and feel no need to upgrade. audio is much more satisfying to pour money into imo

>>714676768
>shitter than my 3060 Ti from 5 years ago even though it's supposed to be two generations newer
How does that even happen?

>>714685778
xx50 cards were always entry level poorfag shit, this isn't new. A GTX 760Ti was noticeably faster than a GTX1050 too.

>>714681004
In your own post you say the reason you think you need 4K is because they are forcibly making 1080p worse and you decide to pay up anyways because you are such a good goy, it is what it is, people always look for reason to justify wasting their money on meaningless things

>>714685015
1080p 480hz looks good to me
Also lol at your list. Is the poorfag ryzen and 3080 (which go used for like $300 now) what's in your build
Also let me guess, the 1440p screen you own is 100/120hz or a chinkware tn panel?

>>714686107
>1080p 480hz looks good to me
1080p output looks awful in any game that relies on temporal rendering, which is the vast majority of graphically intensive games from the last decade.
>Also let me guess, the 1440p screen you own is 100/120hz or a chinkware tn panel?
Not exactly.

>>714686306
>He's never heard of dlss
>160hz
>He genuinely didn't realize that resolutions beyond 1080p were bloat and he should have been chasing a higher refresh rate
Makes sense with you using any AMD processor that isn't x3d

>>714686684
>He's never heard of dlss
DLSS cannot help you when your output is only 1080p. No, DLDSRing or DSRing higher doesn't magically mean you're now playing at that higher resolution. Your image quality will be noticeably weaker than 1440p and pure garbage compared to 4k.
>Makes sense with you using any AMD processor that isn't x3d
I have a 5800X3D.
>he should have been chasing a higher refresh rate
I had a 1080p240hz display a few years ago and realized quickly that anything above 150hz or so is mostly irrelevant to me.

>>714674870
DLSS4 Performance at 4K (1080p internal resolution) looks better than native 1440p... allegedly. Wouldn't know because my monitor is 1080p.

1080p still the champ

>>714687437
and also for what it's worth, they're pretty much the same in terms of performance in benchmarks I've seen

>>714687049
>DLDSRing or DSRing
Stopped being used once transformer model came out.
>image quality will be noticeably weaker
1080p dlaa still better than 4k performance, the setting you'll be using on literally anything that isn't a 5090 in any AAA game from this year.
>>714687437
It only looks better until you move the camera

>>714677435
>100k a year
You make 5 times what I make, yet I have a 4090 and a 4k system and you don't

>>714676028
More like

>Stealth marketing thread

>>714687546
>1080p dlaa still better than 4k performance
LOL. 4k performance not only looks better than 1080p DLAA, it looks better than 1440p DLAA. But how would you with your 1080p/1440p monitor even know that? You can't test it. Want me to test it and show you?
>It only looks better until you move the camera
It looks better in every scenario.

>RTX 3060
Any decent GPU upgrades to be had right now for ~$500? Or should I wait?

>>714676768
Nice fucking numbers bloated with a decade old video game and a fucking Counter Strike.

>>714688898
Yes games that people actually play. Maybe you should ask techpowerup to add in mindseye hmmm?

>>714688427
>he assumes I don't have a 4k television
>>714688461
5070
9060xt 16gb if it's at msrp

I thought paying 400 for a card was retarded theres no fucking way I'm paying used car price for a graphics card.

>>714674870
How did they get away with it? It's so obvious when the dynamic resolution kicks in.

I have a 1070. I think I will upgrade to a 9070xt. I want to play stuff like Horizon Forbidden West, Last of Us 1, and Jedi Survivor at 1080p ultra settings.

>>714690140
A 9070XT is wasted on a 1080p monitor unless you've got a killer CPU that lets you drive high triple digit framerates all the time.

>>714690237
thats why DLAA/FSR Native AA exists. if the game is too light, you increase the res further.

>>714690387
>you increase the res further.
How do you increase the res further than 1080p on a 1080p monitor?

GTX1060 reporting in

>>714690140
If you're at 1080p there's no reason to not just go Nvidia, at least then you'll have framegen and (more importantly) ray reconstruction.

>>714690237
With some retarded gaytracing settings I imagine you could make GPU-limited scenarios with that GPU even at 1080p. Now another question is whether any of that is worth it.

>>714674592 (OP)
to what?

>>714674592 (OP)
How do I do that, I already have a 9800x3d and a 5090.

Goyim… the screen is so small

I cannot see the breasts or anus of the girl

Goyim… do you not feel the desire welling up within you? You must purchase, goyim….

>>714674592 (OP)
Retarded res chasers always thirst and are never satisfied. 1080p master-res.

>>714684817
DDR5 prices have seemingly stabilized compared to what they were at launch. I went from 32GB laptop (that i self upgraded from 16GB) to biuilding a desktop and going 64GB. its the best option imo.

>>714692001
>to what?
>Rust Lake
kek. Get a 9800x3d
>32GB RAM
o i am laffin

>>714690510
nvidia and amd both did this a decade ago in their driver.

https://www.nvidia.com/en-us/geforce/news/dynamic-super-resolution-instantly-improves-your-games-with-4k-quality-graphics/

today you have dlss (dlaa/dldsr)/ fsr (native aa) instead of bilinear scalers.

>>714674592 (OP)
I upgraded to a 1440p monitor a few days ago. Leave me alone.

>>714690510
If you ever played PC games in general, they sometimes include a resolution scale and let you set it more than 100%. Resident Evil Remake games come to mind. You can tell it to do 200% so 4k becomes 8k or 1080p becomes 4k.

>>714692637
That's called supersampling and it's not an actual resolution increase. Real 1440p will look noticeably better than 1440p being supersampled on a 1080p panel.

>>714674592 (OP)
I upgraded to 4k in 2015, about a decade ago. 8k isn't there yet and I doubt its necessity. A 5k 27" screen might just be enough to match or exceed normal human vision at typical desk viewing distances.

Graphics are ultimately the biggest reason for gaming stagnation. When entire budgets are set on fire to show facial hair you lose out on actual gameplay that matters.

>>714692892
higher resolution is not always better. plenty of shit 4k tvs that look worse than 1440p oleds.

>>714693053
>higher resolution is not always better.
Higher resolution is objectively always better in every metric other than performance.
>plenty of shit 4k tvs that look worse than 1440p oleds.
That isn't related to resolutions. Take that exact same 1440p OLED and manufacture it as a 4k OLED and it'll be objectively superior.

>>714685015
>Ryzen 5600
>9% higher avg speed than my 5500
I'm good kthxbai

>>714692881
shit wrong thread