Philips Momentum 43-Inch 4K DisplayHDR 1000 DCI-P3 Gaming LCD Now Available

54 Comments

View All Comments

• xype - Tuesday, July 3, 2018 - link

  He can’t play the games he wants at the settings he wants on 4K, and you’re telling him he’s "wrong" and stupid?
  
  You’re a retard.

• JoeyJoJo123 - Wednesday, July 4, 2018 - link

  >He can’t play the games he wants at the settings he wants on 4K
  
  Here's the thing, idiot, there's three people in this situation.
  1) The graphics card manufacturer.
  2) The software developer.
  3) You, the one playing games.
  
  For the graphics card manufacturers, they're working closely with fab companies like TSMC for products on future process nodes before it's even out in the public. They're inherently limited by what TSMC and current technology can manufacture. They're inherently limited by the pricing and availability of memory they can interface on the GPU. They're inherently limited by thermodynamics and how much power their chip can consume at the process node they're stuck at and pushing the envelope too much can burn them. AMD Fury GPUs weren't particularly well received since their forward-thinking HBM got too expensive over time and the power consumption was high compared to competing products, outside the silicon's ideal operating efficiency. You can “push the silicon” harder, but it doesn’t always make a better product.
  
  Yes, let’s blame the damn GPU manufacturers for not getting their shit together. Don’t they know GPUs operate on magic? They’re the reason why “4k 60hz gaming™” isn’t possible.
  
  For software developers, they’re under time and budget constraints to make a product and ship it out the door to meet investor and consumer demands. Whether it’s the 27th Call of Duty or a completely original game, a publishing company sunk money to develop it and they’re looking to make it back with game sales or support down the line from expansions/DLC/microtransactions, or whatever cost model(s) they employ. Ultimately early design decisions with the game inherently limit what future patches can rectify down the line (in terms of optimization). It’s not always sensible to go back and optimize it so well that the game performs at 4k 60hz smoothly if all that work won’t result in sales that justify that extra development time; the game was already produced and sold and the bulk of its lifetime sales have already passed in most cases. 4k monitor users are in the utter minority anyways.
  
  Ultimately, some blame falls on the software developer, and they should’ve employed better design decisions to make more optimal use of computer resources to make a game that’s playable at 4k 60hz from the beginning, but development costs doesn’t make this feasible, so the best they can really do is push those lessons learned into future titles.
  
  And then there’s you, the “entitled gamer™” that likes to point the finger and blame other people, when it’s a matter of PEBCAK. You aren’t a hardware manufacturer, no amount of whining makes process node shrinks happen faster. You aren’t a software developer, no amount of whining makes games look prettier and operate in a more optimized manner. You only have control of two things here:
  
  1) Buy better/faster hardware. This costs $$$.
  2) Tune your game settings according to your system’s specs to get the best balance between visuals and performance.
  
  You don’t get to whine on Anandtech article comments without being called out for being stupid for not realizing these facts. If you’re too poor to afford a better GPU, hit up the spam bot in the comments section with the totally legitimate pyramid scheme they have going on to afford a 1080Ti. If you already have a 1080Ti + 8700k + exotic cooling and overclocks, then you’ll have to make compromises on settings, because the only thing you have in YOUR CONTROL are the amount of money you spend on entertainment and the performance you can eke out of your system when enjoying your games.
  
  And again, I don’t give a shit if I come across as rude. Facts are facts. Deal with it.

• xype - Tuesday, July 10, 2018 - link

  Your "attacking the poor GPU manufacturers" argument is a straw man. So you’re still a retard, because you’re completely missing the point. Go eat some boogers or play with your poop a bit to calm down.

• close - Wednesday, July 4, 2018 - link

  @JoeyJoJo123, JoeyBoy, your comments don't make sense. People don't care how YOU like to play games and what you're willing to sacrifice. They want to play them like THEY like it.
  
  Pointing out that they can drop some settings is helpful. Insulting them for not wanting what you want is... not smart

• edzieba - Wednesday, July 4, 2018 - link

  "Uhm. That’s like him saying a car isn’t fast enough to drive on a highway at reasonable speeds and you going "Idiot, you just have to drive it at 30mph!""
  
  To use the car analogy, it would be like loading every car up to it's maximum rated operating load, then complaining it doesn't hit the maximum possible acceleration.
  
  If you want to run at 4k, maybe just easy back a bit from the visually-indistinguishable-but-I-need-everything-at-11 "Utra" settings to more reasonable 'high' (or even 'medium' if it doesn't hurt your 1337 reputation too badly) and performance will be perfectly fine.
  
  Game developers will always scale target performance to what GPUs can provide. As cards get faster, newly released games will get more graphically complex in lockstep.

• Bizwacky - Monday, July 9, 2018 - link

  >Game developers will always scale target performance to what GPUs can provide. As cards get faster, newly released games will get more graphically complex in lockstep.
  
  Is that really true? Modern high-end graphics cards can easily push basically any game at 1080P ultra at 150+ FPS, which 95%+ of gamers are at that resolution or below. I don't think developers really optimize for the highest end hardware, outside of certain edge cases.
  
  Obviously new games get more and more graphically complex, but I'd bet that has more to do with the average gamer's hardware getting faster. I.e. what are laptops from the last couple years capable of? Or for many games, what are consoles capable of? As TVs and consoles move to 4k, I think we'll see more and more games optimized to run at 4k, with not too much thought put in to what an 1180TI can run.

• xype - Tuesday, July 10, 2018 - link

  "If you want to run at 4k, maybe just easy back a bit from the visually-indistinguishable-but-I-need-everything-at-11"
  
  It’s not "run at 4K", it’s "run at 4K with the settings I like". Both perfectly fine as a personal preference, the former being achievable today, the latter less so.
  
  "I’d like ham and eggs." — "We have no ham, you should get the eggs only." — "Well I won’t have the eggs then." — "You complete imbecile, it’s both with eggs, is it not?!"

• cocochanel - Tuesday, July 3, 2018 - link

  You're absolutely right. But equally guilty are game developers who throw so many graphics options around, that one needs a degree in CS to understand.
  Performance can be affected by so many things, like it's the CPU doing the physics or the GPU ?
  Throwing the physics or AI at the GPU may overload it.
  Again, game developers keep this info to themselves.
  So, how is the average user supposed to "optimize" their game ?

• GreenReaper - Tuesday, July 3, 2018 - link

  Honestly, that's the developer's job. A good development team will usually spend time on figuring out the ideal settings, but many don't and punt to the end-user.

• Holliday75 - Tuesday, July 3, 2018 - link

  I click on the option that says "Low", "Medium" or "high". Usually works.