Multi-monitor, ultra wide or 4K: What delivers the best gaming experience?

[Emexrulsier]

Interesting write up, but it's more of a matter of what one can afford. None of my friends would go for anything less than 4k if the cumulated price required to run anything smoothly wouldn't (still) be so prohibitive.

No one I know (true gamers) would go for any 4K displays less than 120Hz ... oh wait they don't exist...

 

[Guest]

Great article! I used the same analogy before purchasing my Dell U3415 in January 2015. I am so happy with this monitor. For productivity the screen real estate is fantastic. For movies which is something I have not really done on a monitor previously it is superb! For gaming its absolutely phenomenal the best immersive experience I have had to date.

Now all we need is a curved 21:9 OLED 34"- 38" with 1ms response time @ 120hz refresh rate and that would be the dream monitor in my opinion.

If you are on the fence about a 34" 21:9 don't be just get it you will be so happy you did.

 

[DaveBG]

For me nothing beats 4k on a single monitor. No bezels no spanning fewer cables no problems.

 

[cliffordcooley]

I wonder what DX12 is going to mean for 4K capable graphics cards.

 

[Guest]

Went from a Seiki 39 inch 4k to the Dell 34 inch wide curved.
I love looking at the Dell but I really do miss the size of the Seiki.
I think I'll be trading me Dell in for a larger curved 21:9 I think.
Maybe 37 inch might make me happy?
The smaller size of the Dell is a bit easier to manage for the eyes though.
But I kind of feel a larger screen is better for immersion then a widescreen.
Though a widescreen might help you in games since you can see more around you.
I was using 3 R9 290s to run the Seiki and I think the noise was just as annoying then the screen tearing. Vsync at 30 fps not so good.
Noise cancelling headphones did wonders for the noise.

 

[Mozz020]

I think that's going a bit too far. Not everyone enjoys FPSs where they slap a room's worth full of high detail in front of you and a pre-rendered 2D image in the distance. There are games that don't resort to such antics simply because they don't have to render huge open spaces.

Well sure, but why would I spend thousands of dollars on a computer to play games with graphics that don't take advantage of my hardware? If I have a titan and 4k montior I don't want to play metro, I want to play Crysis 3, farcry and planetside.. Sure you can have games that don't have wide open areas, but essentially you have crysis 2 at that point. They couldn't take full advantage of the cryengine because the setting of the game didn't allow them to. Metro has an amazing engine, but personally I think the game looks like garbage because of it's styling and setting.

Enthusiasts who are making the investment into 4k aren't going to want the closed quarters console style gameplay. And while I will be buying a 50" 4k TV to use as my daily driver, I wont be gaming at 4k. I'm buying it so I can have the extra usable screen realestate.

seriously, you have to drop at least $1500 on graphics cards to even get started at 4k.

I have 2 MSI GTX 970's and a 40" Panasonic 2160p TV. I'm running games at 4K really well , And the total cost for those cards came to under 550 (Not much more than a single 980)
The detail is mind blowing coming up from 1080p, Just Like the first full HD experience all over again!
Is it worth the money? That's subjective.. But I can say first hand gaming at 4K dramatically improves detail in any game! (that supports it of course, Not every game on the planet does)
But if you just don't care either way, Then no point.

 

[yRaz]

I have 2 MSI GTX 970's and a 40" Panasonic 2160p TV. I'm running games at 4K really well , And the total cost for those cards came to under 550 (Not much more than a single 980)
The detail is mind blowing coming up from 1080p, Just Like the first full HD experience all over again!
Is it worth the money? That's subjective.. But I can say first hand gaming at 4K dramatically improves detail in any game! (that supports it of course, Not every game on the planet does)
But if you just don't care either way, Then no point.

the close up detail, yes, but I hate it when I have the game "maxed out" and 20 yards in front of me there is foliage "poping" into render distance and it drives me up the ****ing wall. There are tricks they use to(like LODS) that make the game appear to have more detail than it actually has. most people don't notice this at all, but I noticed that at 4k these tricks are even more obvious than before BECAUSE of the increase in detail. There is a transition phase between trick and no trick(and that distance of that trick is usually about 20-50 yards depending on the game). I cannot stand it when I can see the game stop rending a shadow at a certain distance or lowering the texture size further off to save resources(even when maxed out). What good would 980SLI and a 4k monitor do me if there is no extra detail in the distance to see. It's only more obvious that things are popping in and out of the FOV. Until these problems are fixed and addressed, I'll stick to 1080p. Even if I own a 4k monitor I will still game at 1080p until graphics tech reaches that point.

however, I don't think it will. See, it's not that it's impossible to do that stuff with current tech, there are games that do. There are just TOO MANY LAZY DEVELOPERS to properly code a graphics engine to display detail in the distance. Rather than write proper code they put in LODS and call it a day. So until devs start doing something other than adding new shaders to games to increase "quality", I will not be shelling out for lots of expensive hardware. maybe get a GTX 1080 or whatever their next gen cards are call when it's released. That'll last me another 5 years until I do that same thing again

 

[Mozz020]

I have 2 MSI GTX 970's and a 40" Panasonic 2160p TV. I'm running games at 4K really well , And the total cost for those cards came to under 550 (Not much more than a single 980)
The detail is mind blowing coming up from 1080p, Just Like the first full HD experience all over again!
Is it worth the money? That's subjective.. But I can say first hand gaming at 4K dramatically improves detail in any game! (that supports it of course, Not every game on the planet does)
But if you just don't care either way, Then no point.

the close up detail, yes, but I hate it when I have the game "maxed out" and 20 yards in front of me there is foliage "poping" into render distance and it drives me up the ****ing wall. There are tricks they use to(like LODS) that make the game appear to have more detail than it actually has. most people don't notice this at all, but I noticed that at 4k these tricks are even more obvious than before BECAUSE of the increase in detail. There is a transition phase between trick and no trick(and that distance of that trick is usually about 20-50 yards depending on the game). I cannot stand it when I can see the game stop rending a shadow at a certain distance or lowering the texture size further off to save resources(even when maxed out). What good would 980SLI and a 4k monitor do me if there is no extra detail in the distance to see. It's only more obvious that things are popping in and out of the FOV. Until these problems are fixed and addressed, I'll stick to 1080p. Even if I own a 4k monitor I will still game at 1080p until graphics tech reaches that point.

however, I don't think it will. See, it's not that it's impossible to do that stuff with current tech, there are games that do. There are just TOO MANY LAZY DEVELOPERS to properly code a graphics engine to display detail in the distance. Rather than write proper code they put in LODS and call it a day. So until devs start doing something other than adding new shaders to games to increase "quality", I will not be shelling out for lots of expensive hardware. maybe get a GTX 1080 or whatever their next gen cards are call when it's released. That'll last me another 5 years until I do that same thing again

You should stop gaming all together if that worries you lol
Despite your gripes, The overall detail at 2060p is still a cut above and well worth investing for a richer experience..
But no point in wasting money if the heart isn't in it.

 

[Mozz020]

(2160p my bad)

 

[yRaz]

You should stop gaming all together if that worries you lol
Despite your gripes, The overall detail at 2060p is still a cut above and well worth investing for a richer experience..
But no point in wasting money if the heart isn't in it.

I will invest in it when its price matches what I feel I'm going to get out of it. New technology is pointless if there is nothing new to use with it.