fps_d0minat0r said: lol the $2000 dollar argument is for people who go around talking about 4k, triple monitors and ultra settings. If you are talking about 1080p and medium settings, I dont think console gamers really care that you spent extra (compared to a console) for a higher frame rate on a game that released this late on PC. I really hope every PC gamer who spent more money on their build than a console gets better performance throughout the gen, but if you didnt spend a lot extra, expect it to fall behind on performance on the newer games. Most devs are not going to optimise their games for old configuration, and even if they do, it wont be a thorough as with consoles. PC parts reach peak performance and optimisation near launch and then become cheaper. Consoles become cheaper as they reach their peak performance and optimisation continually improves. |
If I spend 2000$ on a rig, it won't have a chance in hell of running 4k on ultra, let alone with more than one display connected, if I want my games to run, that is. That would require much more power, you will need massive amounts of video RAM, among other things, some tests with Crysis 3 at 4k resolution with a Radeon 295X2 yielded only about 20 FPS on very high (which isn't the max), a card like that and a 4k display alone would set me back more than 2000$ and it still doesn't offer terrific performance across the board.
4K is beastly, if you want to max that, you'll need at least 4-5000$ worth of gaming rig, especially here where the hardware prices are much higher, and doubly so if I'm running more than one display on top.