[martiuk]

> Seems kinda silly to make a 4K video card when ... nobody on the planet has a 4K screen.

Someone else probably said that years ago when everyone was rocking 1080/1440p screens.

[ErneX]

If you look at the Steam hardware survey you’ll find the majority of gamers are still rocking 1080p/1440p displays.

What gamers look for is more framerate not particularly resolution. Most new gaming monitors are focusing on high refresh rates.

8K feels like a waste of compute for a very diminished return compared to 4K. I think 8K only makes sense when dealing with huge displays, I’m talking beyond 83 inches, we are still far from that.

[int_19h]

Gaming aside, 4K is desirable even on <30" displays, and honestly I wouldn't mind a little bit more pixel density there to get it to true "retina" resolution. 6K might be a sweet spot?

Which would then imply that you don't need a display as big as 83" to see the benefits from 8K. Still, we're talking about very large panels here, of the kind that wouldn't even fit many computer desks, so yeah...

[close04]

First consumer 4K monitors came out more than a decade ago. I think the Asus PQ321 in 2013. That’s close to where we are now with 8K.

How many of the cards of that time would you call “4K cards”? Even the Titan X that came a couple of years later doesn’t really cut it.

There’s such a thing as being too early to the game.

[Eloso]

Gaming isn't the only use-case, but Steam hardware survey says ~4% of users are using 4k screens. So the market is still small.