5K Gaming Is Too Hard, Even for an RTX 5090D (pcmag.com)
- Reference: 0180445703
- News link: https://games.slashdot.org/story/25/12/23/1728203/5k-gaming-is-too-hard-even-for-an-rtx-5090d
- Source link: https://www.pcmag.com/news/5k-gaming-is-too-hard-even-for-an-rtx-5090d
The underlying math is simple: 5K resolution [1]requires rendering 78% more pixels than 4K . That 218 PPI pixel density delivers impressive sharpness up close, but Asus chose an IPS panel over OLED technology to reach it, trading away deeper black levels and faster response times. Asus appears to be positioning the monitor as a dual-mode display -- 5K for productivity and video, 1440p at up to 330Hz for gaming. Early Chinese listings have it priced at the equivalent of $800, roughly what you'd pay for a larger 4K OLED panel.
[1] https://www.pcmag.com/news/5k-gaming-is-too-hard-even-for-an-rtx-5090d
RT is responsible (Score:3)
Turn off the RT and the performance would be more than fine. Ultra settings often deliver very little uplift over high as is, but ray tracing is so little of an upgrade for the performance cost that the only reason to run it at all is to justify paying $2000+ for a GPU. I think rat tracing is generally pointless for most games as well. The performance cost is not worth the marginally better visuals and most games don't want hyper realistic lighting because it gets in the way of design and game play. No game can truly be designed for it until the technology creeps down into the mainstream and low-end of the market and we're several hardware generations away from that still.
Industry pushing things we don't want (Score:3)
This reminds me of the rush to build 3D televisions. It was pushed by industry like this is the next big thing, and you need to buy these new TVs to keep up, but the technology was underwhelming, most movies weren't shot in proper 3D (about the only one would be the original Avatar) and consumers didn't want to wear special glasses, where you had to sit almost straight on to the TV and couldn't lay down on your couch sideways, etc. We don't need 5K even for games. If you think you do, just wait a couple years and your eyesight will degrade enough that you can't see the difference anyway.
It's a mixed bag (Score:1)
I have the LG 5K2K (5120 x 2160) and a 5080 (ASUS TUF RTX 5080 12GB) and it does NOT have trouble hitting at least 60fps on most titles on high settings when using DLSS. The trouble comes when I try to enable advanced lighting techniques like full path tracing. Even Doom Eternal struggles to run with full path tracing at 5K. That said, plenty of titles run great and look amazing in 5K.
If you're using dlss is it really 5K? (Score:3)
Isn't the point of DLSS too run games at a lower resolution in order to maintain frame rate and then upscale?
It really pisses me off the a card as expensive as powerful as the 5080 with 12 gigs of RAM too. That is explicitly designed to force you to upgrade that video card in a few years.... But that's Nvidia for you
Bring back SLI (Score:2)
2 x 5090 will solve your problems. Except for paying for food, shelter, school, etc.
Re: (Score:3)
They've never really been able to get it to work all that well. It's too complicated and two crash prone and requires custom software from the developers. So it's never been worth the cost.
Re: (Score:2)
Plz. In 10 years, largely due to Jensen's NEED for the world's largest collection of leather jackets; you'll just be renting AAA diversity slop for a monthly fee, on rented hardware for a low, low monthly fee, in perpetuity.
Re: Bring back SLI (Score:2)
SLI causes problems with a lot of titles and also isn't available on Linux any longer. (There is still a feature called SLI in the Linux driver but it is NOT SLI.)
Pushing pixels for nobody (Score:2)
Desktop gamers simply do not sit close enough to 4K displays for the increased resolution to matter over 1440p.
Couch gamers would need a 10foot screen about 6 feet away from them to see this 8K nonsense.
10bit color and proper HDR support would be far more meaningful to the average gamer.
Dumb settings (Score:1)
I'm running the LG 45in, 5k x 2k (which is a bit smaller vertically) on a 4090 and it runs most games at 120fps, albeit with some settings turned off. Obviously Ray tracing is the biggest one, but you can also turn off stuff like post processing, global illumination, and maybe turn on DLSS to quality in some cases, and you will hit 120fps without much issues.
Blame unoptimized engines (Score:2)
16K gaming has been possible since at least 2017 on properly coded games, there's been many videos about it. But vibe coders just pump out unreal engine slop.
640k pixels.... (Score:2)
...should be enough for everyone.
Who on earth needs a 5k resolution ... (Score:5, Insightful)
... running at 180hz?!?? Aside perhaps from some high performance VR setup that probably costs 50k of it even is available for regular people.
4k at 60hz is luxurious. At a regular living room distance humans can't even make out single pixels with 4k.
Honestly, at this point I'd be waaaay more interested in edging up color bandwidth and brightness contrast than increasing resolution by yet another iteration. There is still room there and while my cheap ass 27" 1080p business display is perfectly fine for me I do like the experience colors and contrast on my Samsung tablet with AMOLED display. They should work on making that larger and cheaper.
DOS. Gamers (Score:2, Troll)
Seriously. So LCDs and modern displays have square pixels where the old CRTs the pixels ended up being kind of rectangular (I might have gotten that vice versa it's sometimes hard to keep track which is which)
If you have ever played an old dos game on a modern display and it felt a little off that's why. It's especially noticeable with rts' but you will probably also notice it with other games that make heavy use of the mouse.
Going up to 4K helps because the pixels become smaller and the differences
Re: (Score:2)
And you end up with custom LCDs like in the Analogue Pocket, a handheld emulator. It's 1600x1440 which gets you 100 times more pixels than the original Game Boy at the same aspect ratio.
Re: DOS. Gamers (Score:2)
You didn't explain why they would need more than 60Hz.
Re: (Score:3)
I really don't get who this is for. I've been a gamer my entire life, since the mid 90s I've been an avid PC gamer. My current gaming system has a 4090 in it and I've loved it and never seen any issues with playing any game I desire. I play on a 1440p/175hz OLED, and everything I play is set to175fps. That is more than enough for any game I want to play. I think a lot of the push for 4k, 5k and higher was due to poor LCD technology. Back in the day LCDs really sucked, especially when you were sitting
Re: (Score:3)
Indeed. Unless you have inhumane reflexes (hint: you do not have them), 180Hz is complete nonsense. The receptors in your eyes are slow ass chemical ones, that can detect, under optimal conditions 13ms pulses. That is around 75Hz. Anything faster and you will not see it.
And 5k? You need to sit very close or use a magnifier to even see that.
In short: Anybody with this set-up has fallen for the ads and is wasting money, plain and simple. And many will be kidding themselves falsely thinking it gives them an ad
Re:Who on earth needs a 5k resolution ... (Score:5, Interesting)
> hint: you do not have them
There are people who will swear up, down, sideways, and backwards that they can tell the difference. The same people that will pay for the $3,000 network cable for their HiFi system.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes. And they are right. You can detect the difference via inference. It is even easy: Just drag your mouse in a circle. But you cannot use that speed difference. Not possible.
On the $3000 network cable, that possibility to detect shrinks down to a look at the invoice though.
Re: Who on earth needs a 5k resolution ... (Score:2)
No they haven't. If the refresh rate is super high you don't have to enable vsync to prevent tearing. It's not about people being able to see 180 fps. Just because you dont have need for something doesn't make it worthless.
Re: Who on earth needs a 5k resolution ... (Score:2)
Wtf are you talking about? Tearing?? What kind of cheap shit equipment from the 90s are you using?
Re: (Score:2)
That is complete insightless nonsensical crap. If you do not have vsync, you will get tearing, _regardless_ of refresh rate.
Re: Who on earth needs a 5k resolution ... (Score:2)
What about movement? With 180Hz you'll see a series of close images that look like movement rather than that jumpy thing you get with 50Hz. I don't know ... like when you move mouse and it stops moving and starts jumping? Any idea?
Re: (Score:2)
Does not make a difference. You cannot use this to improve anything. You are not fast enough.
If you prefer smaller (!) jumps to larger ones, sure, waste your money. But it is a purely esthetic difference.
Re: Who on earth needs a 5k resolution ... (Score:2)
High refresh rate means no tearing with vsync off. It definitely has a use.