DON'T Game at 8K - RTX 4090 Demo
Vložit
- čas přidán 24. 04. 2024
- Thanks to MSI for sponsoring this video! You can purchase your own RTX 4090 SUPRIM Liquid X 24G at geni.us/2CGki. If you're looking for a great 4K monitor for your gaming, check out the MSI Optix MPG321UR-QD at geni.us/3rjRBV
8K gaming is finally possible with the new RTX 4090, but does anyone REALLY care? How much of a difference can you even see in games on a giant 8K TV?
Discuss on the forum: linustechtips.com/topic/14641...
Purchases made through some store links may provide some compensation to Linus Media Group.
► GET MERCH: lttstore.com
► SUPPORT US ON FLOATPLANE: www.floatplane.com/ltt
► AFFILIATES, SPONSORS & REFERRALS: lmg.gg/sponsors
► PODCAST GEAR: lmg.gg/podcastgear
FOLLOW US
---------------------------------------------------
Twitter: / linustech
Facebook: / linustech
Instagram: / linustech
TikTok: / linustech
Twitch: / linustech
MUSIC CREDIT
---------------------------------------------------
Intro: Laszlo - Supernova
Video Link: • [Electro] - Laszlo - S...
iTunes Download Link: itunes.apple.com/us/album/sup...
Artist Link: / laszlomusic
Outro: Approaching Nirvana - Sugar High
Video Link: • Sugar High - Approachi...
Listen on Spotify: spoti.fi/UxWkUw
Artist Link: / approachingnirvana
Intro animation by MBarek Abdelwassaa / mbarek_abdel
Monitor And Keyboard by vadimmihalkevich / CC BY 4.0 geni.us/PgGWp
Mechanical RGB Keyboard by BigBrotherECE / CC BY 4.0 geni.us/mj6pHk4
Mouse Gamer free Model By Oscar Creativo / CC BY 4.0 geni.us/Ps3XfE
CHAPTERS
---------------------------------------------------
0:00 Intro
1:17 Retesting the 3090
3:09 Upgrading to the 4090
4:54 Trying Native 8K
7:20 Is HDR On?
8:03 Something a Little Bit Newer
10:15 Why 8K is a Stupid Bandwagon
16:56 The Math
18:36 Closing Thoughts - Věda a technologie
Me with a 1080p monitor and an integrated graphics: Okay, I won't.
rip
Get a job then Indian it's not that expensive to afford if you work hard for it
Me with a 5 year old laptop 😶
But 1080p is still good
@@pessiescobar4707 🤓
watching the 8k bluescreen struggling to slowly render-scan in at 5:50 was my favourite part
8k half-life soon?
Now that you pointed it out, same
I guess the CPU was like: WTF was that? It couldn't have been the 4090, so it must be CPU trying to come up with a 8K bluescreen
8k asmongold impersonation soon?
EU will ban 8K TVs by March 2023 due to high power consumption. Let's hope power hog gpus is next on the list.
Gamers in 1998: “is gaming at 720p even worth it?!?”
More like is it even possible for gaming on 720p ??
@@Samrat74737 720p was possible with Computer monitor back in 1998. I mean they went higher then 720p back in 1998 on a CRT monitor.
@@SuperCartoonist but gaming and all stuff was still on 420p or 240p what's resoulation of ps1 take that way. PS2 bought 480p gaming but yeah on pc it was higher resolution.
@@Samrat74737 I'm not talking about gaming on a CRT TV. You can change the resolution on a computer operating system, Microsoft Windows was capable of doing that even back then.
@@SuperCartoonist nice
14:46
I like how Alex always immediately figures these kind of tests out
came here to say the same
As a 1080p user i can't even imagine how the 16 times resolution of my screen would look like
you wouldn't be able to tell unless you put your eyeballs directly on the screen.
@@Born_Stellar Depends on your eye sight, though your eyesight would need to be in the 11th percentile LOL.
1080p is so incredibly trash, It's like going back to playing on nintendo 64. I can't imagine going back to it after experiencing 4k gaming.
Do yourself a favor and get a cheap 4k display or even 1440p. You can find one for less than $300 these days.
The performance we are hitting is getting to the point of "Why in FUCK you need that"
Honestly the best part about 4k is when a pixel dies you wont notice because it is so small
Wow, 8K looks so detailed on 1080p.
😂
It does. That was previously known as 8xSSAA. You know, super sampling Anti Aliasing?
Seriously, a 4k TV is next on my big tech purchase list
😂😂😂💔
it looks better on 720p
We are definitely beginning to see the law of diminishing returns here. Back in the day, going from 480p to 720p was amazing, 720p to 1080p was also amazing, 1080p to 1440p was great, but I believe that's where the law of diminishing returns began. Then, 1440p to 2160p was also an amazing upgrade, but you would only notice it when gaming or watching a movie on a big screen. 8k is great and all, but I think 8k is not going to be worth it for the average user. For cinemas however, I could see 8k being much more useful in that kind of setting. You guys do bring up a good point when it comes to 8k and VR, but we definitely won't have headsets capable of 8k anytime soon and when we do, you will probably need to sell a kidney to afford it lol.
That surprisingly aged really well
1080p to 4k wowed me when I seen it for the first time. Like wow. It was so beautiful
You need to test high res games with games that have long render distances. That way there can be more on the screen due to distant objects squished into less screen space.
5:52 watching it have to draw the blue screen was pretty impressive.
i find it hilarious how long it took to draw the BSOD.
So impressive the power connector catches fire 🔥
@@meknowu1 Something tells me you're an AMD fanboy...
@@2hotflavored666 Something tells me you're an Nvidia fanboy...
@@2hotflavored666 Both amd and nvidia have stopped caring about power efficiency and are trying to one up each other with performance instead
I love Colton.
Also Alex and Jake immediately recognizing that it wasn't native 8K was impressive
I was surprised nobody else figured it out given that they still had the fps counter visible.
It's also impressively dumb that they think it matters what CPU they are using for these tests lol. This is 110% a GPU bottleneck, not sure why they brought up not using 13th gen or 7000 series
@@pcmasterracetechgod5660 Agreed. But I'm guessing they know from experience, that they will get comments on it, if they don't adress it in the video.
There's people who know where to look, and people who don't. 8k is not that important for a TV - not a display, for a monitor it's pretty useful especially when 42 inches large format display is starting to become a thing. I have 4k 42 inches and the lower pixel density is pretty notiecable even at a meter away
Scripted video
shadow might be a bit clearer. 12:00 and the trees texture and shadow looks better. but that's the same with any resolution increase, the color tones, shadows and light looks lightly more gradual but that makes less and less difference as you go up in quality.
4090 at 8K: 60 frames per second
My computer at 1080p: 60 seconds per frame
I have worked in games a long time and texture texture resolution is always a challenge due to memory. Normal texture sizes are often 2048x2048 but 4096x4096 are also used even though they are a bit less common. I try to author our textures in 8k to make them future proof but often do not submit them to the game because they take so much disk space. If you walk up to a wall you could even argue that the resolution needs to be higher than the screen resolution if you are close enough. I would say that most games do not have enough texture resolution to do 4K gaming justice
Back 20 years ago we got a high res texture pack for Unreal Tournament and it looked great, one of the tricks it looks like they used was applying a repeating fine texture across various surface types (wood grain, cement bumps, scratches or rust on steel), so almost every surface in the game was given fine texture, just not unique texture. I feel like that strategy would still provide most of the visual feedback people are looking for at high resolutions today while consuming minimal memory and without demanding assets be authored at extreme high resolutions.
I always install 4k/8k mods, TW3 4k+ in 3D looks absolutely stunning. No idea what century you are living that you run out of disk space, I only have 1 archive HDD, every other disk is Sata SSDs and M2 ssds and my conputer was build 9 years ago. Only gpu needed to get upgraded since then
@@alexanderschu6933 im talking as a developer. If the games take 50-100GB now and we double the resolution the size will be 4x higher which will of course put a larger strain on internet and say console storage.
@@andreasoberg2021 Ah ok you talk about consoles. As consoles arent even close to high end graphics like pc gaming I dont care much. I dislike fake high res upscaling and tearing too but most gamers dont have good eyes at all 😉
@@alexanderschu6933 Sadly the limitations of consoles limit the PC games a lot so rhey are almost always the target. I always fight to add extra quality features on PC
I love how Alex and Jake immediately noticed something is fishy from the fps counter alone :D
haha, yes immediately they knew from the fps
In retrospect they shouldn't have left it on the screen
@@dexopaw exactly what I thought, would they have still been able to tell?
@@Adlata Are you silly? That won't damage the product at all. I can tell you haven't been around watercoolers in your life.
@@Adlata if that thing would be damaged just from holding it like that, you dont want it in your system
What's the keyboard called you're using in the video?
Been looking for a couch desk for a while now.
Great vid nonetheless!
im about 30-60 cm from 8k screen. but it in 1080p mode sometimes. 8k are so small. what if youtube could run in real 8k RAW. would that not needing about 80 tb up down ?
I do like how Alex immediately noticed it was 4k because it was too good for 8k
Lol, he saw the fps, Alex knows when he's being used as a lab rat
I absolutely loved how Alex was like "nope, you guys are up to something. I know where I work."
Jake as well. He noticed how high fps was
So proud of Alex for instantly catching onto the fact that it was actually not 8k
And I hate how much they all look at textures 🙈
@@UwePieper what are you going to use your monitor behind you or you facing your back at the monitor?
@@UwePieper Kinda reminds me of when people complained about the textures in HL2 and other early Source titles. Like, are you playing a game or are you staring at a wall from 2 inches away? Jake had the right idea with the trees off in the distance.
@@sntslilhlpr6601 Well kind of. You need any modeled parts that has fine details and might show clipping or stairs. So diagonal edges are fine. The power lines Linus looked at were perfect. Trees in the distance could be textures, as well to save performance. Textures have a limited resolution and will look bad if you get too close. The mesh has an unlimited resolution. You might have simple objects but you can scale those up to infinity.
@@UwePieper I was thinking the same exact thing.
8K is useful on flatscreen as well. But downscaled to 4K. You’ll obtain detail much better than antialiasing can provide.
question, is that cooling solution on the 4090 needing any sort of assembly skills or is it just insert gpu in mobo and go?
I think the game graphics will need to get closer to photorealistic before those resolutions will matter at all.
Have you seen the Unreal Engine 5.1 demo? Graphics like that are totally possible soon.
@@user-jy6ur8gb1c I hear ya. It is getting really good very fast. But so far, 8k isn't really needed. Can definitely wait on the graphics to catch up though and save a ton on an 8k monitor/tv. You know how much prices drop on things in just a couple years.
@@The1stDukeDroklar yeah true. It will also take some years for game developers to actually put new game engine feats and qualities into practice anyway. UE 5.1 is just out i think, so it'll take some time for developers to actually make products.
Same thing happened with the release of the 64bit Audio studio software (like Apple's Logic Pro X) after those came out back in 2016 if memory serves me right. It took some 3 years or so before music producers began releasing songs of notably better quality.
@@user-jy6ur8gb1c Hahaha you have absolutely no clue what you are talking about… So 64bit software sounds better than 32bit? Lol
@@Strepite please explain better this
The only time I’ve noticed 8K looking better than 4K is in stuff like space scenes and heavy particle effects. 8K obviously allows for smaller individual particles, which combined with OLED can look truly incredible, but it’s a really rare occurrence that you’ll get enough 1px or 2px particles at once in a game or movie for it to matter.
8k up close is pointless it's for massive areas when large screens are needed. We'll be back on electron gun panels soon and the resolution won't go up for a while. 4k still isn't even the standard for streaming yet it's fake 4k for a start. They panel tech will got back to electron guns soon just watch were going back to the days of no buffers and just insanely fast response times. They already admit that's the plan if you are up to speed with the very latest panel tech. Even old CRT is back people love the look and the speed they feel great even when you play silly fast mouse settings on Brutal Doom etc they cope no problem. The 165hz monitors don't they can do the speed but they are taxed out doing it they get ghosting and blur and alsorts. Electron guns don't care they live at that speed.
@@bigduphusaj162 never again will electron guns be used, they simply require too much space
You know back in the days my roommate wanted a 17" screen and in the shop they said it was rediculous (only if he was a cad designer). 16K will be about default I guess. The higher res the better it is possible to make things look real. And the higher the res the bigger the screen. The bigger the screen the better experience.Just love it.
Even in this case DLSS plus sharpening can achieve the same visual effect
wouldn't you be able to see more particales by just turning on taa or antialiasing 2x
How about editing the new 8k features on s24 ultra & the Sports cameras GoPro (13?) DJI ect... my 2070 super on editing software will crash at more than 3 mins of 8k30/4k120/5.3K 60... would be very interested if you made video on how it performs with them video powers compared to RTX 4090 AND RTX 2070 SUPER....If I upgraded everything will my 4k monitor be fine editing 8k with the 4090, or will it crash and need a 8k monitor?
How do you keep the temps down with such a small number of case fans
Nicole was right, most games aren't developed or intended to be that high of res. It depends on the resolution of the materials applied to the walls, boxes, etc.
Nicole was right, most games aren’t developed or intended to be that high of res. It depends on the resolution of the materials applied to the walls, boxes, etc.
Nicole was right, most games aren’t developed or intended to be that high of res. It depends on the resolution of the materials applied to the walls, boxes, etc.
But the main difference isn't how the textures look. The main difference will be the edges of objects
@@LaggyKar exactly. With Unreal Engine 5 Nanite technology where it dynamically tesselates geometry so that the polygons are about the size of a pixel it will make a difference. Not that I care, the real pertinent number isn't the resolution anyway but the the pixel density. I'm totally fine with gaming in 1440p on a small monitor.
We're gonna need unreal engine 6 to be released lol
Nicole brought up a really important point: game assets must be in 4k/8k in order for the resolution to actually work.
Maybe you could test it in minecraft (with 4k/8k texture palcks), because this ensures you are using correct assets. Also you could test RTX (and hdr? don't know if minecraft supports this) this way
what. nah. What about the geometry etc. If that were the case then games with "1k" textures would be as easy to run on 1080p as in 4k and so on.
Well textures in any case benefits from a higher resolution rendering
Yes, the geometry contours (specially the electricity wires as Linus pointed out) is seen crisper the higher the resolution is, but because the screen has more pixels to draw/raster it. Less chances for staircase. But the objects textures resolution is super key to not see pixelation. Of course, it depends on how the modeler distributed the textures and made the UV mapping, as if using 6k texture but for a full town, you might end up seeing very pixelated textures. The moment you approach the camera to something which texture (easy to see with text) gets to fill up (in that moment) in screen a bigger resolution in pixels that that texture itself has, you see pixelation (even if blurred and etc to minimize the effect), is very difficult to avoid, other than using large textures for everything. But there are many tricks with shaders, these days.
So, yep, IMO a game must be having prepared a version for 8k, in the matter of assets, to actually appreciate if there's a difference "really" in 8k. In normal 3D rendering, of course there is, you get a ton detail more rendering a scene as an 8k render than a 4k one. But there are many factors in games. Counter Strike, if it's not a version or mod with very high res textures, wouldn't see a difference in 8k, for example.
Screen res and texture res are different things. Not many games have 4k textures. Just think about it, if your entire screen is in 4k, the asset would have to take up more than your screen to even see it pixelated. Anything smaller will not need 4k. How many times do you walk right up to a wall and think "this would look better in 8k"? Thats why 1k and sometimes 2k textures are enough. Many smaller assets wont even need 1k and large walls and floors etc have tiled textures. Also textures are already very demanding so keeping them as low as possible makes sense. This is also why 8k textures make no sense at all, not in minecraft or any other game.
@@Xirpzy Unreal Engine 5 with Quixel's Megascans in an open world and indoor environment is the true way you can appreciate the 8K experience. These games they've been playing on 8K is the wrong way to show off what 8K is truly about. It's like them trying to show how amazing an NES/SNES game looks on at 1080p resolution.
They should've at least try 8K with "A Plague Tale: Requiem"
Anyone know what Linus was using to put his keyboard and mouse on?
Is that the correct way to mount a front radiator? I thought the tubes were sposed to be on the bottom of the radiator
As others have said, if the textures aren't natively 8k then you won't see more --in the textures--. The real difference is in the quality of the lines where they meet and how sharp or less stepped and aliased they are. Take a cube and turn it 45 degrees so the lines are angled and compare those between 4k and 8k and you should see a difference.
you could almost argue at that point, due to the sheer pixel density, that you could basically disable AA and it would still look buttery smooth
I can't believe those idiots were looking at the textures instead to the edges. And those have job on gaming channel. Unbelievable.
I mean technically you can more clearly see the pixels of the textures
8K won't be a thing until 2026 when games will be talking about 8k textures and an 88 inch 8k OLED will be 10k or less....
Next time if you're wondering why a teammate on your team is staring at the walls and trees the entire time, you know they're testing out their 8K display.
🤣
Or they're high asf
@@RT-uq1mp in lol LSD looks 16k reso dont even need video card :D xD
I feel like the comments as well as the people in the video are all talking about textures as viewed up close, when even at 1920x1080 the textures would be a bottleneck. The only way to tell a difference between 4k and 8k would be by looking at *distant* textures and objects.
I've been using a quest pro as a display for a couple months and i recently added an 8K option in the nvidia control panel to have more resolution in headset then what my physical display has. On a 3090, games have a pretty hard time but reading small text outside of gaming has been a lot better then with 4K.
what kind of keyboard that's also a table is that on your lap? I want that, what is that?
The rubes really caught on to how important assets are to how useful 8K is. If you had assets that at a close range stood up to an 8K display you’d have a different experience. When the only thing benefiting are the edges of geometry there’s not going to be much going on. It’s basically just AA.
I’d be very interested to see something like setting up CS with textures that utilize the 8k and see if folks can tell. Still going to be pretty limited but I’d be curious to see how much things would stand out at that point.
Yep. Then you have the problem of delivering 8K texture assets to customers. Games are already huuuuge, and even with compression reducing the effective scaling factor it's still a lot more data.
They'd need a special sample game to really show off the difference, because the lower resolution versions of the assets have to be derived from the same high res source, and no game is shipping assets that high res.
They should be able to find or commission a demo though.
One of my biggest gripes about games for the last 20 years has been muddy textures.
The "4K era" has been a good step in the right direction be we have a LONG way to go before games actually look realistically detailed.
The worst part about this video is "The Math" that Linus is using at 17:18 in the video is woefully out of date, 60PPD is nothing but a marketing ploy used at the time when it was a convenient crutch to convince people to upgrade from "SD" to "HD", by telling everyone "60PPD is the last upgrade you'll ever need".
Everyone has always known 60PPD was wrong.
300 Pixels Per Degree is the limit of perceptual detail in "average human vision (look up "Visual Hyperacuity", all the companies using the 60PPD "Visual Acuity" are basing their conclusions on incomplete data).
To reach 300PPD with a 55" 8K TV you need to be sitting nine feet away, which almost perfectly matches the viewing habits of the average american household.
You can have and enormous advantage when you see an enemy far away... In a 4k screen it will be like I dunno 40 pixel, in 8k 80... So the far details will be sharper, But if you need an 4090 for get ultra quality... Better get an 4060 and play 4k.
Totally agreed, Jake was definitely looking for the important parts with the actual distant tree geometry, and Nicole raised a very poignant part of your argument there.
@@budthecyborg4575 The limitation is filesize, textures can't be compressed because you can't make textures from nothing. The better the textures look, the fatter the game. 8K textures would definitely start pushing games into terabyte territory.
I like that Nicole made a very good point, if a game wasnt designed for 8k, or even 4k, the assets may not even benefit from the higher res
Imo a better benefit for a card like the 4090 really is atleast playing higher quality settings while still having head room
Which makes me wonder if games like Skyrim can benefit from it with 8K texture mods. Modding sadly is always overlooked when it comes to these performance reviews.
You should be able to notice the difference in geometry tho. If you can't tell the difference between 4k and 8k from the geometry, specially with aa off, you wouldn't be able to see any difference in texture either.
@@motokid6008 i think because ideally you'd want to measure just the base game, and tbh not every game has mods available, nor would every player want to mod their game, so it would probably affect proper testing
@@motokid6008 Mods are made by furries
Something *very* important to me is filesize. 4k resolutions, especially in proper large games, will make the filesize skyrocket to the point of any bigger game from like 15 years ago suddenly being the size of a AAA from a couple years ago... And just looking a bit better. I really dont think 8k textures are going to be worth it at all.
Hey Linus, I really wanna know where you got that gaming lapboard that your using from? Like what's it called, how much was it, and where did you get it from?
I want one so bad, but when I looked online on places like Amazon most of what I found is made to sit a laptop on, so it has like a rubber bumper on it to keep the laptop from slipping off which would hurt my wrist, and then there are ones that have a flat board on top, but thick padding stuff that is supposed to sit on either side of your legs, which wouldn't fit in my chair that I sit in cause it's hot wide enough for two thick pads and me. Or some have huge pads across the entire underside which angle them up at the far side which would cause me to have to bend my wrists backwards to be able to use my keyboard, which would cause cramping after a while as well.
I did manage to find one, but most of the listings for just the board part say it's sold out, and the ones that have the board combined with a keyboard are almost $500 which is ridiculous since it's not even RGB, doesn't have a number keypad, or a mouse with it at all, it's just a flat board similar to what your using and a keyboard without the number keys.
Also I think it might be a great idea if you could make something like that and sell it on your lttstore.com ya know.
But seriously please let me know what that is your using!?!?
Important note: those THX viewing distance guidelines are not applicable to gaming at all. In video games, a display can occupy your entire field of view and you won't have any problems... as long as the ingame FOV is adjustable.
This is the beauty of having a big crew. I love seeing other people's reactions!
I'm glad you guys covered this topic. I've been telling friends this for years.. Using 65" screen size for example, you would need to be sitting LESS than 4' away in order to tell any difference between 4K and 8K resolution, which is substantially closer than a comfortable or recommended viewing distance. Even a 4K screen would be indistinguishable from 1080P if you are sitting more than 8 1/2 feet away.
maybe for movies, but live rendered content benefits from higher resolution much more, anyone saying 1080p and 4k doesn't yield a big difference is just in denial at this point, even at 1440p my games look disgusting compared to 4k, playing old games in 4k feels like theyve been remastered
I sit 1,2m from my curved 55" 4k TV I use as computer monitor, at that distance you can see the pixels in some games so you also have to use anti aliasing. But when watching a movie even that close I can not see the difference between 1080p and 4k, only in games the 4k give visual improvement.
@@a64738 At that distance with that screen size you're at about 54°, which is about 10° less than being able to see every single pixel on a 4K screen. To see 100% of the pixels at 4K would require moving up to be 0.975m away.
Differences in movies being less apparent to you may be due to watching streaming content which is always going to be lower quality than full blu-ray quality. I believe you may notice the difference increase if you were to watch a blu-ray in 1080P and a UHD blu-ray of the same film back to back.
@@yesyes-om1po I'm just talking about math. Depending on how far away you view the screen from, it's going to take up a certain angle of your horizontal field of view. That angle scales linearly with screen size.
If you sit far enough away, your eyes cannot resolve more than 1080P resolution no matter how large the screen is. The further back you move, the fewer pixels your eyes can differentiate between.
If you watched a TV that was at the other end of a football stadium, you would not be able to differentiate between video on a modern 8K TV or one from the 1950s that had only displayed 440x330 pixels.
As he said in the video, this will help VR. I still don't know if VR will be great some day, but I'm willing to wait to see.
Also if 8k is available it brings down prices for 4k and more good 4k content.
That explains why I had to get glasses because my eyes started getting sore after getting my 4K display a few years ago xD I do agree with Nicole though it would depend on the resolution of the textures whether you'd notice a difference or not
Just bumped up after way too long to 1440p and can’t wait till I can get a 4K monitor once these 8ks come out
I noticed that people are trying to compare resolutions by getting close to textures, but as they noted the texture quality doesn't change when the screen resolution increases. The difference in texture quality could only be assessed from a distance, and even then the game engine might swap out for lower quality texture based on view distance.
Correct, they need to test with better games.
Yeah, using CS:GO to test this was a weird move. Didn't make a ton of sense.
@@LRM12o8 the source engine doesn’t drop textures down to a lower resolution from a distance
Yeah people seem to pay more attention to texture resolution than image resolution, maybe vram is more important. Which nVidia is going the wrong direction on lol
@@evolicious there is no better game. No devs in their right mind are delivering assets that can stand up to 8K. You’d have to mod a game to do that.
as a dev i assure you we DO NOT make graphical assets at 8k, nor often do we even make them at 4k. The amount of compression, file size and file handling would just be a waste of time.
You would end up with games being over 200GB's or higher and compression is already a massive issue within our games.
4K Ultra HD Blu ray can't handle that
Time to bring back detail texturing. lol. But for real, if we switched to a model of using AI-generated detail textures, we could probably do a lot more for a bit less.
please keep making them at 1080P my pc cant handle 4k shit it screams
You dont need 8k textures for the game to look better at 8k. Even old games like Gothic look amazing in 4k, im sure its even better in 8k.
It depends on the content . IF for example you were building an open world game and you wanted mountains and tress to be super detailed to far away distances , and or a space simulator , and want the planets to look super detailed when traveling there. then in such cases there will be a noticeable major difference. between 4k and 8k.. it depends on what kind of game they doing or how far you want the textures quality to be.
2:24 what in the world kinda keyboard is that??? And where do i find one??
Watching you hold tech stuff without a care in the world is always a trippy experience. Holding the card by the tubes! 😂😂😂
I feel like the staff at LTT should understand by now that screen resolution is not the same as texture resolution - doesn't matter how many K's are in your screen, zooming into flat textures isn't going to change, lol.
At least Linus gets it, when he points out the power lines going diagonally across the screen.
Bingo, doesn’t matter how Many bazillions of pixels your GPU and Display can handle, if it’s not in the game to be displayed in the first place 🤷🏻♂️ haha.
I was thinking this myself, and they used fucking CS:GO of all games for the comparison 😂
@@Cr4z3d right ? No one fucking uses CS:GO as a modern benchmark 😂 a potato can run CS:GO at 120 fps max settings.
this I why I don't understand why use game CSGO or doom for 8k comparison.. and they HAVE games with 4k and 8k texture packs. i just want see how these gpu handles Current games like Arkham knights or cyber punk at 8k
@@tarikcollins778 Arkham Knights is trash.
nicole hit the nail on the head. no 8k textures means you could run at any resolution you want and it would look the same. You need a game with that level of detail on the source side
I guess? I pay attention to jagged edges and stuff. like Half-Life 2 looks nicer in 1440p than 720p and that game was made in 2004.
To add to that all the game models will have very low poly mesh’s so wouldn’t benefit either.
only partially true. there should still be a overall image clarity boost and less jagged edges on geometry
Main problem is that no physical game can ship with 8K resolution graphics on disk as UHD Blu-ray support 4k resolutions at maximum. So until an actual disk format arrives for 8k textures that gets widespread support in the console world, the best you can do is 4k. Game devs are not going to have multiple versions of their game available for each console based on if you are a physical owner or digital owner, as that would really make the physical owners upset.
It's like running a game from the 90's at 1080p, the textures are still 640x480 so it's going to look like 640x480
What lap setup keyboard/mouse is Linus using? I want one for my living room PC lol
The way Linus holds the 4090 by the hose makes my anxiety trigger😂😂
It's a good lesson that typically past 4k gamers start to care more and more about stability and frame rate than a higher resolution
Imo it's 1440p
Past 2k there's serious diminishing returns regardless. You're really just looking to lessen jagged edges and if you have 2k and MSAA at 8x it's almost inperceptible from 4k native.
@@DixonErHands that depends on the size. I shutdown my cheap $270, 6 year old Sony TV 40inch because ppi too low at 1080p 60hz. I like the color and the size but for PC u need at least 120hz and 4k at 40 inch. Monitors colors suck, especially if it's ips glow, backlight bleed.
@@DixonErHands Apart from MSAA not being a thing anymore with deferred rendering 1440p with MSAA 8x would also perform a lot worse than native 4k. Also it's all about pixel density and distance. My 4k 42" TV on my desk really doesn't look that great when it comes to resolution.
With older games that still had decent image quality I might agree that 1440p would be enough for most scenarios as long as you're not exceeding 24", but thanks to modern games relying so much on temporal techniques that cause terrible image quality issues you want the resolution to be as high as possible. 4k nowadays generally looks worse than 1440p did 10 years ago at the same monitor size.
Gotta have that CRT
Nicole did have a great point, a lot of game devs are simply just not rendering everything in 8k making it look really just the same. Personally I would have possibly tried to see what native uncompressed 8k footage be 4k would have looked like with the upscaling (yes I completely understand that storage limitations would most likely be a thing when viewing 8k) but all in all a gpu pushing that many pixels on a native display is amazing considering I was still rocking a 570 for a long while before parting out my gaming rig when the cpu simply refused to post.
Probably what the stuttering was in Doom. Game engine bottleneck, not GPU or CPU.
She made such a good point that they switched to a modern game halfway through the video
Yeah, past a certain resolution it becomes clear that the textures are crappy. That's always been the way. It's like taking an old DOS game intended to run at 320x240 and running it on a 1024x768 monitor. It'll either look like a postage stamp (windowed at 320x240) or hammered dog crap (full screen). LOL
@@Psythik Agreed! I thought the same.
@@Psythik Same thought... I was like who tf compare 4K vs 8K with a game like CS:GO?
4k and 8k really only help with far off textures or new games that use textures that large but in VR 4k and 8k are super important even with an index or quest 2
We need 8k+ for VR
what kind of lapboard is that? I have the corsair k63 lapboard but i like the look of the one in this video
For streaming, most import important issue is for the streaming providers to actually use a decent enough bitrate to use 4k to its full pontential. When used with low bitrate, the image doesn't even look like 4k anymore, because the compression hides all the detail. Even professional grade raw camera codecs usually use some sort of compression.
Same reason why an actual 1080p bluray looks better than 4k youtube.
A good use for 8k would be 4 player split screen. That was always my favorite way to play halo. Also, 8k is cool for photography because you can view photos close to their native resolution and get a better idea of print quality.
To bad splitscreen coop will be dead by the time everyone can actually use 8k.
Honestly, screen size is much more important. Doesnt matter if everyone has a 4k „screen“ if its 20 inches. For that, better to just get a projector so everyone can have a decently sized screen
The print quality thing is available, everything else is silly
we all played 4 player split screen halo on xbox original on a 36" tube tv and we had a great time....4 people in the room banter snacks etc was way better......tossing 4 player killed gaming for everyone i know.
the internet bandwidth capable wasnt good enough and even later with good internet it sucked by comparison.....
they got greedy to sell consoles and games..instead they killed off a bunch of new gen buyers
@@Wuerschtle we did 4 player split screen on a 21" crt and it was still a blast. Ultimately we're way past diminishing returns, it's just cool. Haha
Why so much nothing ghosting behind moving objects? What happened to Phillips Pixel Plus?
I think 8K is definitely a stretch but VR performance would be worth evaluating. There are a lot of heavy VR games you should be trying on these new flagship cards.
Like what? There are no new demanding vr games
Simply play Cyberpunk in 3D, thats demanding enough for the moment. And dont even dare thinking about upscaling 😂
@@braisedtoast9002 DCS, it fries my 6800xt
@@erwinpatricia6296 hardly a vr game.
I don’t play a lot of different VR games, but I haven’t been able to get gigantic uplifts in resolution from a 3090 to a 4090 like I had hoped going from a 1080Ti, to a 2080 Ti, to a 3090, and now a 4090. There seems to be an issue with the game engines that doesn’t scale very well at ultra high resolutions. But to be fair, I’ve only tested 3 games so far. Well, on my 4090 I mean. Fallout 4 has typically been the game I keep hoping, this next card should get me to 300% resolution scaling, but I went from 180% to 220-230%. It’s something, but I was hoping for at least 250%. Each generation gets me just a tiny bump it seems instead of that huge leap I keep hoping for.
This is a very good point. The difference between 8K and 4K is a difference of diminishing returns. But that also means, that games can now be more demanding without having to take 8K into account.
Something else to consider - are these games simply upsampling 4k textures to 8k resolution? That means you don't have 8k density natively. The game would need to actually have 8k textures, to see the real uplift, of 8k resolution. Like when you upsample 1080 to 4k it looks terrible, compared to games with true 4k textures.
Notice how Linus is gaming on a television? That's because there are a total of 2 monitors on the market that do 8K. They both came out in 2017, both are Dell, one is 32 inches, and the other is 31.5 inches. They are both $4000 right now on pc part picker. The smallest available 8K television is 65 inches on up to 85 inches. Putting one of those on a desk and gaming on it would probably cause neck injury because the center of the screen would be higher than ergonomically natural.
EDIT: Oh I forgot to mention, for those unaware... 8K is stuck at 60Hz for both monitors and TVs.
the human eye does have a max resolution we can see, seems like we may not be able to see in 8K
@@kennylaysh2776 You have discovered the necessary purpose of DirectStorage. Microsoft said they will release DirectStorage version 1.1 by the end of this year, it offers some critical features and improved features that have been missing since then. Most everyone is unaware that DirectStorage also supports RAM-to-VRAM decompression. RAM is faster than even a 15.7GB/s PCIe 5.0 x4 interface. Even slow DDR4 2400 delivers 17.88GB/s. PC games can store critical nearby compressed assets in RAM then the GPU uses hardware accelerated decompression to directly decompress and copy to VRAM, all without loading the CPU. I suppose the CPU will instead be used to handle non-essential nearby eye candy like signs on walls and stuff like that???
But in coming years, there will be monitors using glasses free 3D technology that optically combines a mosaic of many slightly different camera angles into a 3D image. The 'Looking Glass' monitor is pretty mind blowing. (It's real, look it up)
That kind of tech is a pathway to practical use of 8k, 16k, 32k or even higher. I hope that company stays in business, I'll love to see what they will have in 10 years. Or that other companies use a similar optical technology.
But as a plain 2D display, 8k is only useful in really big sizes.
Hi linus. I’ve been thinking a new case that I think nobodies done yet.
Imagine an open case but instead of putting it in a wall. Why not put it in a monitor arm just like a monitor.😅 so you could adjust the case the way you wanted. I wanted to make a case like that. But sadly I don’t have the tools and the money to make it.😢 this is good for people who is leaving in an apartment who is not allowed to modified the place but wanted a wall mounted PC. Fan in japan. 😊
whats that keyboard they were using with like a mousepad built in the side
You should have mentioned that most games doesn't have enough texture resolution to make a big difference. Higher texture resulotion is more important at this resolution. 4K/8K
Edit: Apparently one of the employees mentioned this and I missed. My bad.
Still, I think they should give this topic a seperate part of this video.
And I hope Nvidia will develop an AI for upscaling game textures.
No idea about 8K but i know 4K is pretty damned sharp image quality
It was mentioned by one of the employees
8k is diminishing returns.
Maybe someday we'll see game engines use AI powered scaling on art assets.
I think upcoming UE5 games with nanite would solve the problem
I think that the ability to render games at resolutions like this is only going to be useful in VR, when your FOV is far larger than on a monitor or TV.
That's what Linus said
Just wait until games start to be made for 8K. 8K is by no means testing the limits of human vision.
what is the board Linus was using on his lap for the keyboard and mouse?
wondering if i can get to know what that couch keyboard and mouse setup is ?
Mathematically it makes sense just like you concluded. If you get a monitor large enough to see 8K worth of pixels, you have to sit far enough back that that you can't see the difference. 8K for distribution only makes sense on signage in a mall where you might be standing 2 feet from the screen.
People said the same thing about 4K. But 4K is absolutely noticeable compared to 2K, so 8k will come and stay, but it’s not now
@@niceone1456 - People did not say the same thing about 4K. The understanding of the human eye is still basically the same as it was when 4K was released. There may have been people saying 4K on a 40" screen in the living room couldn't be perceived, but that isn't the same as saying 8K can't be perceived within the ideal field of view.
If we change how TVs are used I could see a wall-to-wall sized screen at 32K even, if it was decoupled from the source material. Being able to draw out multiple "TVs" on the wall for different content while having changeable background wallpaper that blended with the house lighting, or stock tickers near the ceiling, or anything else in the background could be pretty interesting.
@@niceone1456 they did but not for computers- entire research projects were done by the broadcast industry where for instance the BBC determined that broadcasting in 4K would not make any sense financially as it would only benefit a very, very small number of their viewers even in a best case scenario due to where people normally put their TVs relative to where they sit- this is not true for PC gaming in 4K if you like sitting close to a very large screen. However 8K is 4x as many pixels as 4K, so it becomes much more difficult to find a use case for it as the mathematics and capabilities of the human eye just don’t lend themselves to making 8K have a purpose, even if you’re sitting near a big screen- you simply won’t be able to see the difference versus 4K unless you stick your face against the glass. The extra cost, performance loss etc for no upside makes the whole thing a fool’s errand. For most people’s desks with a typically sized monitor 1440P is enough to not be able to see the pixels at all. To put it in context most feature films until very recently were screened at 2K in cinemas until very recently and almost no content is actually edited or mastered in 8K (even 8K releases are upscaled from 2K or 4K normally) as all the data suggests it’s mostly pointless.
What are your thoughts on cinema/movie theatre screens? I could imagine something with a big enough screen like an IMAX there might be a perceivable difference. That and *maybe* simulators for training are the only actual use cases I can think of.
@@joshuatk59 - Flight sims might be one good use scenario. For movies though, the field of view is the biggest issue. If you get close enough for a screen to fill a lot more than about 50 degrees it gets fatiguing to watch because you can't take in the whole scene at once and you have to turn your head to see something happening on one edge of the screen or another. So no matter how big a screen gets you have to sit a certain distance away for it to be comfortable. That happens to be a distance where most people can't make out the 8K of detail.
There are certain scenarios where you might want to fill out more of their field of view, but most movies are not framed that way. Movies almost always frame the image for a small screen with close ups that make someone's head fill the entire frame. That kind of close up doesn't work on a screen that extends into or beyond your peripheral vision.
8K cameras will likely be an important thing because acquiring 8K video gives more flexibility in editing, but distributing 8K is an issue of extremely diminishing returns. Unless you are in a scenario where people are standing right next to the screen or a special video designed to create nausea like those 180 or 360 videos at Disney world, then 8K doesn't make much sense.
The 1% of people with 20/10 vision, who can also afford a very large screen, might love it though.
I think that the texture packs are not 8k optimized, or even 4k in most cases. It's up to the devs to implement 8k textures to take advantage of the resolution. Change in resolution wont impact textures if there's no texture details to add.
Yeah a 9000 yo game like CSGO is a really bad example
8k textures would be super hard on VRAM. I'm not even sure that 24gb would be enough.
which we will probably never have because of three reasons:
1. It'd take expotentially more time to make detailed 8k textures for stuff that doesn't really need it.
2. These would be way too big in size, and no one is gonna download a 5TB game, at least not with today's technology.
3. It'd take more money for actual diminishing returns.
So, I'd say we are about 10 years away from a true 8k gaming experience, if anyone is crazy enough to make all their textures 8k worth of detail on a game anyways
I rather not be forced to download 4K or 8K res textures if I'm not gonna use them. Games are ballooning to 100+ GB sizes already, no need for more forced bloat just because some folks really want nicer looking textures. My solution would be to release said texture packs as free DLCs, that way playees can choose to download if they want better looking textures in their games.
Changing resolution /will/ still impact textures if they aren't scaled up to 100% - so whenever you're further away from it, it still makes a difference.
Nice Video. Can you post a regular desktop running at 8k with like 8 or 10 videos running at the same time ? Why doesn't anyone show 8k desktop with various display intensive workloads ?
Isn’t the retina science outdated for many years already? You might not be able to notice individual pixels from a certain size, but when those pixels create an image it can still be perceived as more detailed right?
1440p upgrades will be the sweet spot for most 1080 gamers-it give the biggest boost in visuals upgrade/vfm.Still good to see the best kit being pushed to its limits-what linus does.
8k and higher makes only sense in VR but there it absolutely makes sense to achieve a wider fov and a higher pixel density, but there you theoretically can combine it with foveated rendering to reduce gpu load
I have an asus 4k hdr 144hz gsync and asus 2k top of the line too side by side , and I can 100% say that with my 3080 I will always and forever run 4k. It looks absolutely better. If you have the monitor and can push the frames absolutely do it. 2k looks half as good especially if you don't have hdr.
@@WCGwkf yeah..... you can't run 4k with an rtx3080. It can barely do 1440p and it still has big fps drops in a lot of games. Even red dead redemption 2 will only run 50-80fps at 1440p. Nowhere near 144fps like you claim.
@@kenshinhimura9387 that cant be true. I got a RX 6700XT, which is considerably weaker than the 3080 and there isnt a game where I would go below 100fps on 1440p
@@mejdlocraftci without fsr or dlss?
Definitely should do a VR video comparing the performance of different graphics cards.
Agreed, because I've always felt: new technology allows for new content and VR just hasn't been great yet and so I sill have some hope for it.
Not the whole Meta-thing, but let's see how far it can be pushed.
@@MadWatcher I would love to see those numbers, as I just upgraded from an I7-3960x (2nd gen) to a I9-10850k and I don't see that huge of a difference with my 1080TI, would be interesting to see some of the different configurations for VR to get the best price to performance ratio.
i just spent a minute wiping dust off my screen and then realized it's just linus's face
The way he was holding it grabbing from the colling tubes while it dangling during intro... bruh
Never personally seen 8K but the jump on movie from 1080p to 4K was soooo good
We are just starting to get lots of 4k content can't imagine how long 8k will take lol
the audio depth beyond 16 bit and 10 bit video are huge improvements for me . any further improvement and its only provable by people with perfect vision or math.
That's because 1080 was never true 1080 but CZcams compresses so 4k is actually near true 1080 quality that's why it looks good I think
8K is going to be a meme for at least a decade or 2. Our eyes aren't good enough to see details that fine grained, even if they exist. You need 20/20 vision and to be sitting much closer to the display than is healthy to notice a difference. At that point, you are not experiencing the medium (TV/gaming), you are viewing digital panoramas at the Smithsonian.
@@brandongroth4569 what if the experiences were tailored to it though? Like it doesn't make sense to just cram more pixels into the same TV or monitor sized screen. Nor does it make sense to just stretch regular 1080 or 4k content onto a giant screen. But if you had content that actually used that screenspace and extra pixels for something it could be cool. Think imax theater in your living room or something...
Makes me really excited for the next gen for VR stuff.
Where you're actually going to need 16K to get a reasonably sharp image.
@@budthecyborg4575 isn't 16k the limit of perception (as in the sharpest an image can be before the difference is physically zero)? and even then, peripheral vision isn't anywhere close to that, I'd wager eye-tracked foveated rendering with dlss set to 16k might be able to run on something less powerful than the 40 series
@@budthecyborg4575 1440p in current headsets look about the same as 720-1080p. you dont really need more than 4k to have a superb screen.
@@budthecyborg4575 Nah, you can even get a reasonably sharp image with a VERY GOOD 1080p headset (rare). Get yourself a GOOD 2k or 4k per eye one and you'll be golden
@@AMan-xz7tx the difference won't be physically zero, nor is resolution the only measure that is important. The other measure that is important is bitrate (See the bitrate video from LTT/Techquickie for explanation) and the screen size compared to the resolution. I would argue 16k isn't close to the human limit holding all else equal. With huge improvements on bitrate and DPI there still is a lot of room to go. I have a couple 2k monitors that look like dog^^^^ compared to a 1080p monitor I have with a smaller screen size. The problem is the 1080p monitor size is worse and its hard to see details that would matter. Anything you are processing also would need to be made to run at the higher detail levels or else you aren't going to notice the difference. Another HAI video ("Why It Takes Pixar 3 Years To Render A Movie" ) which was interesting showed rendering scenes in movies with massive levels of additional detail creating a huge effect as well.
what is that keyboard with the built in mousepad youre using?
What's the tray they're using for the keyboard and mouse?
I would love a double-blind test with two 8k monitors (that Dell UltraSharp, perhaps?) and a series of tests that could show if people can actually tell the difference. Might need a few other resolutions in there also.
Wow, 8K looks so detailed on 1080p.
Nicole made a good point, the quality of game assets should be taken into consideration as a bottleneck, those bullets in Halo: Infinite show this perfectly; you can add as many Ks as you want into a setup but if your feeding it Xbox era assets regardless if it's 1080, 4 or 8K you're going to get an Xbox era view of those models.
yep! though that doesn't necessarily have to always be true. what if you use procedural generation your assets? [also, vector graphics where applicable] and the more powerful the hardware becomes combined with the more research [AND DISCLOSURE] of algos, the more likely this will happen and possibly become mainstream. there's already isolated examples that do this well. and if you look past your biases and do some actual research/exploration, there's a few decades of history in adobe flash where vector graphics were used quite effectively. the problem with low-quality content was *not* the technology. it was creative effort, and to some degree, bottlenecks no longer present in modern hardware. and "performance!" is a myth, you're a fool if you think modern graphics pipelines are lighter than vector rasterization/triangulation. [especially an optimized one, i hear ruffle's rendering is actually faster than flash]
all that said, firmly with linus and his employees' conclusions here. if i were to get an 8K display, it would be to gain screen real estate, not screen resolution. what more pixels is actually *good* for is putting more application windows on the screen.
@@ETXAlienRobot201 AI generated assets would be a good idea, but would rely on developers implementing it and limiting where it applies. There is no silver bullet in using algorithms to improve assets, imagine if in 2001: a space odyssey, the monolith had rounded corners or texture because the AI decided that it was a low quality asset that needed "fine tuning", AI isn't in a place in a place right now (that I'm aware of) that it can recognize the subtle value certain objects have, and having AI blanket solve everything is going to bring it's own problems.
@@festro1000 i said procedural, not AI. also why i mentioned vector graphics because instead of using a fixed number of points to represent a curve, you have an actual curve from which you extrapolate the needed points at run time. even without curves, however, you can generate a lot of different types of geometry. for most/all of this process, you'd still need human-made assets. AI has a long time before being viable [and even then, raises questions], but decent chunks of what i suggest is already implemented in the actual programs used to generate those art assets. to some degree, it's explored by actual games, but typically just the re-arrangement of existing assets instead of creating whole new ones.
the main issue here is this requires a lot more processor power and RAM. i imagine the GPU could make quick work of this with compute shaders. and you can still cache results so this would be feasible even on the CPU. there's always the option of caching to permanent storage instead of RAM, too. this does mitigate some of the advantages of my proposal, however. and i'm obviously not denying the complexity of implementing this.
@@ETXAlienRobot201 Procedural or AI either way your going to have to get devs onboard and still have the issue of assets being modified (by whatever path they decide to go along with) when they shouldn't be, the Monolith being an example, so there is also going to need to be a way to exclude certain assets when it comes to asset generation or post processing.
@@festro1000 if someone wants to mess with the files, they will. it is primarily publishers/suits who care, not developers. now, in the case of say, wall hacks, you do this during the render phase "this wall is transparent and it shouldn't be".
even if the final results are generated, there would be files defining how to generate them, being smaller, they're actually easier to hide/protect. though honestly, there are much better things to use developer resources and computational resources on. regardless of their motivations, hackers WILL break through just about anything you set-up. normal/"legit" end users will however suffer the consequences of those systems.
i emphasized the open sharing of research, and what would not surprise me is if several required components for this are under some stupid patent. especially since my country still has enough brain rot to allow software patents to exist. if not patented, they're being withheld/controlled by other means.
anyways, i don't see much more point debating this. right now it's merely a concept/dream. i just laid-out a hypothetical scenario. i personally don't obsess over models and/or textures needing to be HD, either. i'd as much like to see this tech being used to create low poly models with low-res textures as creating something with as much detail as the hardware of a given generation is capable of handling. this, i actually expect to prove challenging. the tech might itself work, but will the output look presentable? in the most extreme case, let's not generate *any* extra points for that curve. a flat circle degrades nicely, but what about a character's face?
"I don't even think these textures were rendered with 8k or even 4k in mind"
incredible video linus, very high effort.
3:01 what keyboard ⌨️ Linus using?
I love how Doom is literally the test for hardware as small as a screened pregnancy test and ESP's all the way to the highest end hardware leading the industry.
Wow, 8K looks so detailed on 1080p.
@@asktoseducemiss434 I 'see' what you did there...
When your PC goes noisy as fuck and everyone thinks jet harriers have become invading the neighbourhood, all in 8K
The pregnancy test thing wasn't real in that he used no part of the pregnancy test other than the plastic shell. He put in his own lcd screen and computer.
@@Greenleaf_ Doom is so low on system requirements... even an ATM can run it
Spends thousands of dollars on a liquid cooled GPU. This is totally playable!
Finally I can play doom!
yeah there's no point in a 4090 ti unless you're already a jakillionare
I got a aoi evga 1080 ftw hybrid. Is standard watercooled. (But lots of games are not that playable now haha)
"playable" != "affordable"
I bought my liquid cooled MSI Suprim 4090 for $1700. I plan on getting a second to double up on AI experiments.
i have been rocking a Radeon rx 6600 xt for a while
though i wanna upgrade to 2k gaming
what GPU can run every latest game on max settings, (atleast 80-90 fps)
any recommendations?
I could see the aliasing on the sign at 11:40. In person I know it wouldn't be super obvious considering my 1080p monitor is a VA monitor, so everything always looks aliased and I'm used to it, but I could see very the slight jagged lines. In motion and actual gameplay it wouldn't be noticeable at all.
8K is cool but I feel like 4K high refresh rate is the future.
What fate a Slugcat. Prey and predator. As the old world died, a new ecosystem evolved. In a land where even rain can kill. Each creature struggles for its own survival. Each beast has a place on the food chain, which it seeks to deny, and through this ruined landscape strange monstrosities and mysteries, Slugcat journeys along. As a search for shelter. A search for answers. A search for hope. What fate a Slugcat.
@@sillysillyamy. ....
Not long ago we used to think 1440p high refresh was the future. So maybe it'll change!
@@tidelwaver1 Good point. I was curious so I had to check and according to the most recent steam hardware survey the most popular resolution is still 1080p by a large margin >66% followed by 1440p at like 11% so maybe there is no future except 1080p lol?
@@ryanholm3480 Most of the world is very poor and does not have access to displays that have a resolution beyond 1080p. What we should look at are these metrics coming from first world countries where I bet 1440p and 4k gaming have the marketshare over 1080p.
I love how you can tell what members of the staff are more experience in actual video graphics analysis, and wich ones have their expertise in other subjects.
The guys I was expecting to notice right away.
Right away they did hahaha
Does 8k civ allow you to see the whole map at once on screen? If so then there might be some point
Does it look the same cause of screen size and how many pixels crammed into a screen?
16:32 “This ain’t my Master Chief”
XD
The jump from 1080 to 1440 was pretty noticeable for me, but 4k feels like diminishing returns. I'd rather have the increased framerate and extra features at 1440 while being able to stay behind a few generations for a "reasonable" price.
I game on a 2k monitor it wasn't a bad price for the monitor. It's an Viotek flat panel with 2k resolution. My brother games on a 4k TV he had the TV before building his PC. Games like ETS or ATS I get around 90 FPS and 70FPS in areas with allot of buildings and traffic. I use a Nvidia RTX 2060 Super.
what kind of keyboard is that? that you can hold the mouse on it? any model number?
You might need to wait until we have games with 8K textures n stuff to really notice a difference. If at all. I can say with some limited experience watching 8K footage on an 8K TV there is a difference although much smaller than the jump from 1080 to 4K. But it does look very nice.
Still using a 1070 with a 1080p monitor, I still wonder how 4k gaming feels for certain games that I still play, 8K seems just way too crazy
It feels slightly sharper on larger screens if you sit closer. That's it.
if u get a 48inch or 43inch 4k tv ull notice how clear it is then a 1080p 32inch trust me the 1080p looks so last gen and cant go back to 1080p anymore lmao its just too blurry im stuck on 4k60fps gaming ever since i got my 4k 43inch tv and love it just pure clearness and smoothness after switching from 1080p to 4k for gaming on my ps5 and was worth it
1080p is still perfectly fine, I would much rather go with 1080p/1440p at 144hz than 4k at 60. You can't really see the sharpness with a 24-27 inch PC monitor anyway if you don't sit inches away from your screen
I'm on an rx580. Sometimes I watch youtube in 1440p60 and break out the box fan.
Edit: to be fair I have a 144hz 1080p monitor and I usually tweak to keep it above 100. MW2 runs at about 80 (fps *and* C, lol) on recommended and I've been more interested in playing than tweaking because of reasons, but the box fan thing isn't necessarily entirely a joke 😒
@@locuscuztheyfocuse4581 Yep. I got a 14.5 inch 2880p laptop a few weeks ago and now I realize how bad my 1080p 23.8 inch looks.
Surprised Linus didn't go into the implications of 8k for VR. I know there's probably not any headset out there that can really take advantage of this yet, but I think if 8k has any practical benefit, it'd be with VR.
Pimax 8K does 6K.
oh there definitely is.
That's the only reason I want more powerful gpus.
Like even up to 12k probably.
But we still need better VR, while running 8k helps in some top end headsets, we need way better headsets.
@@user-wq9mw2xz3j we dont need better headsets, we need better games. everyone, especially meta, seem to be too focused on hardware and not enough on games
@@lewis0705 i cant agree. what I am most interested in using vr for is simracing (possible other sim too). There are good enough already, in fact almost been for a decade.
The issue for me is mainly on the headset (and after that, the gpu powering it, but they go hand in hand).
Check out the holographic displays from Looking Glass. With mosaic tiled many cameras optically combined into one image, this type of technology will necessitate pixel densities well beyond human capability to see. It makes anything above 4K useful, IF it has the optical layers for glasses free 3D.
This type of technology is still in it's infancy, and I don't know what kinds of patents Looking Glass holds, but it is a glimpse into what we could be expecting in 10-15 years.
Kind of the middle ground between VR and normal displays, a virtual window. One company is doing it, I hope the tech goes somewhere.
hello there! i was just wondering what you do with all of the expensive awesome gaming gpu,s and cpu,s etc. ? do you ever give the (i would imagine a warehouse of stuff) over the years thats been given to you for you content to your subscribers? do you do giveaways? because i would love anything that you get to play with its awesome
watching this video at 360p rn and I didn't notice a difference between 8K and 4K
One thing I've noticed while learning Chinese is that 4k is SUPER beneficial, since many Chinese characters have intricate details/strokes that aren't as visible at 1080 (though it's less an issue with simplified than traditional characters). I wonder if there's any further benefit to 8k for Chinese, especially on things like public information boards (e.g. a bus or train timetable which will have a lot of information on a digital board)?
no, people don't actually need to see strokes clearly to make out characters, the general shape is really enough. we know this because ppl have no trouble reading fonts that are super bolded and lose a ton of definition or very fonts.
@@martinkn.5161 Some* people have no trouble reading that
As with TVs, you'd probably have an easier time reading it with a _larger_ 4K signboard, so that you don't have to get as close to read it
I want nvidia to keep pushing for 8k gaming, so that I can have nice fps in 720p on my old budget card.
How does that work?
Bruh my Surface Duo phone does 60 with Skyrim at 720p
@@DarkSoul-il1sg but can it run crysis?
Yeah that's totally how that works, you'll get more frames on your old ass system when Nvidia releases the 5xxx series.
With the minimum requirements to drive 8K, they likely won't optimise for old or underpowered GPUs, so you'd still be shit out of luck.
Is that a keyboard with a section for your mouse?
probably not going to notice a difference unless the textures or particles have fine enough detail to be lost in 4k, which as you might imagine is not likely to be the case unless it was built for a resolution higher than 4k to begin with. Distant objects will be visible sooner, if the game doesn't set an absolute draw distance (I'd guess they often do to reduce the workload and for balance issues in competitive games. The same also applies to fixed FOV, which would implicitly increase with resolution if devs didn't explicitly limit it) though typically displaying at non-native resolutions does often cause some blurring. so really the fact that 4k and 8k look identical is more a testimony to the televisions awesome upscaling.
Where I could really see this making a difference is in High end VR where you might want to push 4k per eye at high fps. I want HL:Alyx benchmarks!!!!
Absolutely. VR benchmarks are going wild with the 4090 right pushing with the Index and Varjo Aero. 4090 is absolutely needed for those HMDs.
I think 2 4k monitors is still half as many pixels as one 8k one
@@tidelwaver1 It is, but with high fps being so important for VR this card would help tremendously.
@@tidelwaver1 Yep, it is half. Which is a good thing imo, since you can get more fps
EXACTLY! While it's true that more than 4k resolution for gaming just doesn't make much sense for normal monitors because of the distance,
it makes a LOT more sense for future high end vr tech where you could easily make use of 8k per eye (or even more) at even higher refresh rates than you would need for smooth monitor gaming, since your basically trying to simulate real life! If you just wanna game on a monitor tho never go above 4k.