The ATI (AMD) graphics are already better than Nvidia for 4k graphics, especially from a price/performance ratio with the 290x2 and 390x cards. The issue is tha

The ATI (AMD) graphics are already better than Nvidia for 4k graphics, especially from a price/performance ratio with the 290x2 and 390x cards. The issue is that none of the cards from either ATI nor Nvidia can do 60fps on high quality settings with any of the games that are currently benchmarked. The ATI cards do worse at all resolutions up to 4k, which markably benefits by higher memory bandwidth. The question for consumers is: why spend >$400 on a card optimized for low-setting play at 4k? Especially when it's a marginal visual improvement over 1440p? Instead, with current-generation cards, players will rather use a lower resolution and higher settings.