3 ms·
i'm sorry was he benchmarking this at 5120x1440? like seriously do people really game at that resolution?
by cchance 3y ago
i'm sorry was he benchmarking this at 5120x1440? like seriously do people really game at that resolution?
- denkmoon 3y agoYeah, it's referred to as super-ultrawide. There are a reasonable number of monitors out there with this resolution. It's more for race/flight sim type stuff IMO but if you got it, why not play everything at that res provided it performs well.
- ihuman 3y agoThat's two 1440p 16:9 monitors next to each other
- kristofferR 3y agoThat's the best resolution, it's the one of 49" 32:9 ultrawide monitors like the Samsung Odyssey Neo G9. Look at images of it from the top, that'll help you understand how immersive it is.
- paavohtl 3y agoAuthor here! That's my exact monitor. I actually started writing a blog post about it earlier this year when I got it, but didn't manage to finish it yet. It also has its own share of technical issues, though overall it is the best monitor I've ever seen or used.
- stefan_ 3y agoHe is explicitly not benchmarking, just exploring the render pipeline.
- jeroenhd 3y agoTo me, that seems like an absolutely amazing resolution for many games. Very rarely do you need more pixels in the vertical direction (most games will just end up rendering sky or ground) when left to right are all you really need. That resolution is still fewer pixels than a simple 4k display, which modern games seem to drive at 60fps quite regularly if you buy beefy hardware. A graphical gore fest like Doom runs at over 100fps on 4k on the card the author has, so a mostly static city builder should also operate fine at a resolution like that.