1.33% of Steam users play games in 4k

Jan 24, 2018
712
1280x1024 I can't tell you how many times this aspect ratio has fuxked me. Text going off screen, cutscenes looking terrible. Fov sucking in most games. Really want to buy a 1080p monitor but I should upgrade my 750ti first.
 

SprachBrooks

Banned
Oct 28, 2017
1,353
If I gamed on PC, and I sat at my desk close to the monitor, I'd definitely need 4K.

Cost is the biggest factor as to why this isn't common.
 

AegonSnake

Member
Oct 25, 2017
6,982
User Warned: Platform warring
Article fails to mention how a 100% of Era PC gamers patrolling Xbox One and PS4 Pro threads play their games in 4k 60 fps.
 

BeImonkey

Member
Dec 9, 2017
1,860
Strangely seems like console is the place for high resolution gaming now thanks to Pro consoles and cheaper access to 4k TVs.
 

Cyanity

Member
Oct 25, 2017
6,232
1440p continues to be the best resolution to aim for. 4k is just too expensive on PC right now. 1080 is fine if you're on a serious budget though, I guess.
 

caff!!!

Member
Oct 29, 2017
1,758
Considering a 5:4 resolution has bigger gains than wide ones, I wonder if steam is growing with an older/cheaper computer audience or everything outside of 1080p and old laptop resolutions are within margin of error.
I've been on the "4K gaming is being pushed way too early" bandwagon for quite some time now.
People got 4k TVs, want 4k content, and the console companies are more than glad to deliver.
 

SlothmanAllen

Member
Oct 28, 2017
1,672
1440p and 4K require much more GPU power then 1080p. 1080p provides good enough image quality at an affordable price for the entire system.
 

dFORCE

Member
Dec 7, 2017
296
It means nothing. A GTX 1060 is capable of achieving 4K gaming.

Many PC gamers can play at 4K, but they prefer higher frame-rate over 4K resolution.
 

Joker13

Banned
Oct 28, 2017
825
i find it absolutely amazing how most (well, at least ALOT of) pc gamers in era play at 4K based on performance threads


rich fucks, i am still rocking 720p and it's serving me just fine
 

Instro

Member
Oct 25, 2017
7,494
Another thing I've noticed with 4k monitors is that they basically only come in sizes that are quite a bit larger than monitors of the past came in. 27" screens and up. For people PC gaming on a desk, that may seem too big.
 

myzhi

Member
Oct 27, 2017
829
With Gsync, I have a very hard time telling a difference between 50-120 fps, but I can easily see 1080p vs 1440p vs 4K. I guess I prefer higher resolution.
 

Mesoian

Member
Oct 28, 2017
10,271
I can't hit a reliable 60fps in most games at 4k.

1080p isn't going anywhere anytime soon.
 

Uraizen

Member
Oct 26, 2017
1,175
I can't run games at a locked 60fps, native 4k, and on max settings. I can do that at a native 1080p, so I see no reason to upgrade.
 

Lukas Taves

Member
Oct 28, 2017
4,359
Brazil
Considering that pc usually don't resort to reconstruction techniques and the price for the hardware that can consistently pull 4k at high settings, and the fact that steam population is quite big this is not too bad really
 

defaltoption

The Fallen
Oct 27, 2017
3,749
Orlando, Florida
They're overpriced for a good one and to hard to run. I think it'll be another 5 to 8 years before 4k hits 20%. When gpus in the $200 to $250 range can do it and decent monitors are $250 to $300 we'll get there.

A bad monitor is like $500 and a good one is $2000 for only 27 inches it's ridiculous plus a decent GPU that can play at high settings 60fps is around $600 to start. Not gonna have mass adoption anytime soon.
 
Oct 25, 2017
3,299
Nvidia charging crazy amounts for their upcoming 4K 60fps capable card doesn't help. They picked the wrong time to join this ray tracing stuff.
 

GHG

Member
Oct 26, 2017
6,648
i find it absolutely amazing how most (well, at least ALOT of) pc gamers in era play at 4K based on performance threads


rich fucks, i am still rocking 720p and it's serving me just fine
Bruh...

You should be able to find a free monitor that has a better resolution than this from a local business that is upgrading their hardware...
 

Deleted member 43077

User requested account closure
Banned
May 9, 2018
5,741
sometimes i play in on 4K on my tv.

4K on PC wont take off like it has with console until 4K/60+ is achievable all the time and when monitors that are 4K/120 are cheaper. I can get a 1440/60 monitor for the same price as a 4K/60 monitor tho
 

tyraniboah

Avenger
Oct 27, 2017
3,365
Cost needs to come down. The moment I can afford a 120hz 4k display with hdr, gsync, and a corresponding card, I’m all in on 4k. Until then I’m happy with 2k and gsync.
 

Jazzem

Member
Feb 2, 2018
1,761
I almost exclusively play PC on my 4k TV now, though obviously with a GTX 1070 that's not native on new high end titles ha. Was a bit of a pain to hack in custom resolutions between 1080p and 4k, was surprised NVidia didn't come with a bunch of those as standard.

It's a treat for older titles and emulation, thankfully the number of games that don't support 4k in my Steam library is vastly outnumbered by those that do. One irritating thing though is you often have to right click>properties>Compatibility>Change High DPI>Override DPI on many game exes if you have desktop Zoom set to 200%.
 

lazerfox

Member
Oct 26, 2017
1,207
Switzerland
This is slightly misleading because a lot of people are using multi monitor setups and the steam survey only asks about the primary monitor, which in most cases are 1080p/1440p screens.
 

I KILL PXLS

Member
Oct 25, 2017
5,869
In all honesty I'm totally cool with like 1440p. 4k would be nice, but I really don't think it would add too much to my experience. I'd rather invest in something like G-Sync.
 

BuBu Jenkins

Member
Oct 27, 2017
1,323
As someone who's going to get a 2080ti/i9-9900k I'll be playing on a 1440p/144hz monitor. 4K simply isn't appealing to me without being able to max out games in all their glory while maintaining at least 90fps.
 

Calles

Member
Nov 1, 2017
6,134
Have you seen what 2080 cards cost in most countries? It's around 2000. A good amount of people are not going to pay that for a graphics card alone. To say nothing else of any CPU, mother board etc that may need updating and cost money to be replaced.
 
Oct 25, 2017
2,168
New York City
I just bought a 1440p monitor to upgrade from 1080p lol. But it is 144 Hz and has Gsync so I'm really much more excited to try going beyond 60 FPS than to go higher resolution. Hopefully my 1070 can handle that.

Besides, I barely notice the difference between 720p and 1080p anyway...
 

Neo0mj

Member
Oct 26, 2017
2,886
I'm more surprised by how low the 1440p+ is, since 10% of users have 980 ti+ level cards. That means only half of them have a monitor that's above 1080p.
 

J_ToSaveTheDay

Avenger
Oct 25, 2017
4,153
USA
PC players like to prioritize framerates and refresh rates over resolution, I feel, and vast majority of PC users don't seem to use top-end components -- I think it constantly comes back that hardware configurations tend to overwhelmingly be in the low-to-mid-range, and those users are well aware that pushing a 4K output isn't plausible if performance is a priority.
 

ILikeFeet

Member
Oct 25, 2017
28,405
Another thing I've noticed with 4k monitors is that they basically only come in sizes that are quite a bit larger than monitors of the past came in. 27" screens and up. For people PC gaming on a desk, that may seem too big.
My desk is already crowded with my 1080p monitor, a 1024p 4:3 monitor and my cintiq. Fuck that 27" mess. I'd like HDR, but it's locked behind unnecessary premiums
 

univbee

Member
Oct 25, 2017
143
Every new TV you buy today is 4k.
Not even close, especially since they still sell TVs that max out at 720p, and they almost certainly sell better than the bulk of 4K TVs due to cost and other factors. Even now, non-4K TVs are still pretty plentiful in stores (can you even get 4K TV's below like 40 inches?), and a lot of people will get a new TV just for functionality's sake, especially with the lack of accessible 4K content; Netflix/Amazon only really have their original programs in 4K (it's a single-digit number of other things they have in 4K) and you need an internet connection too beefy for most people outside of cities, TV providers that have it at all will only have it for sports and might not even hit 1080p for anything else, and owning physical media had dropped massively in popularity since the height of DVD.

It's a bit different for PC since there's the 1440p middle-ground there, but in the TV space it's a bit weird because it's a direct jump from 1080p to 4K (with multiple dynamic range options), while when HD was picking up you could sort-of meet halfway by getting a 720p set, which was still a significant step up from 480p. But costs get out of hand in a hurry with PC monitors, a solid 1080p monitor can be just a little over a hundred bucks while you're looking at $300+ for 1440p/G-or-freesync (and this gets even more ridiculous for higher resolutions) and that might be money better spent on a PC upgrade of some sort.
 
Oct 27, 2017
2,540
U.S.
I don't really see the point in buying a 4k monitor right now, the ppi of a 25"-30" 1440p display is already very high and the best hardware can't really put out 60 fps consistently if you're running new games using high settings.