Four K or Five K.
Four K or Five K.
Discover the Steam Hardware & Software Survey on the official store.
4K remains costly unless you seek a VR experience with even sharper images. More users are adopting 4K each year, but progress is gradual due to performance demands and price. Do you clarify what you meant by this resolution? Was it just about the screen, or also about running games at higher settings?
I use a 4K display but on an older 1660 Super. I got it mainly for PS5 gaming, thinking I'd need to run PC games at 1080p for scaling. However, the panel really shines at 1440p, offering a noticeable improvement over native 1080p on a 1080p screen. I play my older PC titles (like 2019 and earlier) at 1440p while the newer games I buy for PS5 are in 1080p. I just want to avoid spending a lot on upgrades if possible.
Only a few people use 4K, but it really boosts performance. Having switched recently, it’s incredible—I won’t go back to lower resolutions for gaming. I don’t mind FPS too much; as long as my single-player games stay at 60 FPS and multiplayer hits around 120 FPS, I’m fine. If you’re in the same spot about FPS and have a GPU that can handle it, 4K is the best choice.
Only in Project Cars 2 with shadows disabled and ETS 2 (a 2012 release) do I use a triple screen at 5876x1080 with corrected bezels. Otherwise it becomes too demanding for my GTX 1070. Even after adjustments, I still hit under 50 frames per second in Project Cars 2 when many vehicles are rendered. Other simulations perform worse, averaging around 30 FPS with ACC active. This ultra-wide resolution is useless outside sim-racers; for other games I go with 1080p. I’m aiming for a 1440p display once GPU prices stabilize, since my current RX 6800XT costs $2000 and the RTX 3070 is around $1500. The main barrier right now is the cost of GPUs.