Console gamers? Or single player gamers?

Is that really a positive point towards pc? Its still more expensive and will have to wait a whole year.

I think there is a part of pc gamers that are into it because of what it can offer and what price. What we saw from last gen cuz it laste so long was that by the 5th and 6th year into the gen, prey much any pc could beat a console for a good price. with no end in sight for the gen. this time consoles had a mid gen refresh right when the new cards are out and the originals where about to get outclased pretty cheaply. If they can last another 3-4 years for $400 than thats good for almost 4k. considering that most gamers still play on 1080p on pc's. and yes, many cry about 60fps, but that is in no way the standart and the majority of gamers seem to be fine with it and crave pixel count over framerate, unless of course we are talking about dips in the low 20' or high teens.

I suppose I should add "most", but yeah, "most console gamers" don't care about FPS. If they did, there would be more PC gamers and less console gamers.

Most console gamers play shooting games at 60fps. They might not know the technical details but they know that COD plays smooth as hell.

Fighting games are mostly 60fps. Racing sims are mostly 60fps. 

Those games and genres are required to have at least 60fps to be successful anywhere.

the games that require 60fps deliver 60fps(for the most part). So its not that consoles cant handle it, its that devs prioritze visuals over framerate. and for the majority of gamers, its exactly what they ask for.

I'm not saying it isn't there or that they don't appreciate it.

I'm saying they don't care if it has it or not.

Sure thing, enjoy.  That's not an argument for what everyone will do.

There's a breakdown above, of the PC Gamer market:

Enthusiast 16.4 Million (3%)
Performance 60 Million (11%)
Mainstream 481 Million (86%)

You might be among the 3% or 11% in terms of how up to date you like to be with the latest GPUs.

Just for clarification... these are the definitions of Jon Peddie Research:

"In our analysis we use Enthusiast AIB’s as the cornerstone but also account for Enthusiast systems as a pricing segment with averages of $2,199 for desktops and $1,977 for notebooks. The minimum ASP to be included in the Enthusiast class is $1800 and this includes a display factor adjusted for gaming motivation and purchasing frequency."

"In our analysis we use Performance AIB’s as the cornerstone but also account for Performance systems as a pricing segment with averages of $1,551 for desktops and $1,348 for notebooks. The minimum ASP to be included in the Performance class is $1000 and this includes a display factor adjusted for gaming motivation and purchasing frequency."

So 76 million gaming PCs with a minimum price of $1000 / average price of over $1500 (display included)... not too shabby.

http://jonpeddie.com/publications/pc_gaming_hardware_market_report

I think your calculations are mistaken. I have this GPU. OC version, so circa 980. 1440p really hits it hard. 1600p is a no go. The Pro also isn't rendering at 1440, checkerboard 4K has much more pixels than that, so it really is doing a pretty good job.

If you think the kind of people who would never buy a PC anyway would hold back on the Pro because of "Mods" then you are deluded. HDR and affordable 4K is more than enough for the vast majority of gamers and casual consumers. For Christs sake most PC gamers dont even game at 2k let alone 4k.