6 ms·

I think a graphics card tailored for 2k gaming is actually great. 2k really is the goldilocks zone between 4k and 1080p graphics before you start creeping into

I think a graphics card tailored for 2k gaming is actually great. 2k really is the goldilocks zone between 4k and 1080p graphics before you start creeping into diminishing returns.

icegreentea2 2y ago
2k usually refers to 1080p no? The k is the approximate horizontal resolution, so 1920x1080 is definitely 2k enough.
- antisthenes 2y ago
  2k Usually refers to 2560x1440. 1920x1080 is 1080p. It doesn't make a whole lot of sense, but that's how it is.
  - ortusdux 2y ago
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2K_resolution https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2K_resolution
    - nightski 2y ago
      That's amusing because I think almost everyone I know confuses it with 1440p. I've never heard of 2k being used for 1080p before.
    - Retric 2y ago
      “In consumer products, 2560 × 1440 (1440p) is sometimes referred to as 2K,[13] but it and similar formats are more traditionally categorized as 2.5K resolutions.”
  - seritools 2y ago
    1440p is colloquially referred to as 2.5K, not 2K.
    - vundercind 2y ago
      It'd be pretty weird if it were called 2k. 1080p is in an absolute sense or as a relative "distance" to the next-lowest thousand closer to 2k pixels of width than 4k is to 4k (both are under, of course, but one's under by 80 pixels, one by 160). It's got a much better claim to the label 2k than 1440p does, and arguably a somewhat better claim to 2k than 4k has to 4k. [EDIT] I mean, of course, 1080p's also not typically called that, yet another resolution is, but labeling 1440p 2k is especially far off.
      - mkl 2y ago
        You are misunderstanding. 1080p, 1440p, 2160p refer to the number of rows of pixels, and those terms come from broadcast television and computing (the p is progressive, vs i for interlaced). 4k, 2k refer to the number of columns of pixels, and those terms come from cinema and visual effects (and originally means 4096 and 2048 pixels wide). That means 1920×1080 is both 2k and 1080p, 2560×1440 is both 2.5k and 1440p, and 3840×2160 is both 4k and 2160p.
        vundercind 2y ago
        > You are misunderstanding. 1080p, 1440p, 2160p refer to the number of rows of pixels > (the p is progressive, vs i for interlaced) > 4k, 2k refer to the number of columns of pixels > 2560×1440 is both 2.5k and 1440p, and 3840×2160 is both 4k and 2160p. These parts I did not misunderstand. > and those terms come from cinema and visual effects (and originally means 4096 and 2048 pixels wide) OK that part I didn't know, or at least had forgotten—which are effectively the same thing, either way. > 1920×1080 is both 2k and 1080p Wikipedia suggests that in this particular case (unlike with 4k) application of "2k" to resolutions other than the original cinema resolution (2048x1080) is unusual; moreover, I was responding to a commenter's usage of "2k" as synonymous with "1440p", which seemed especially odd to me.
    - nemomarx 2y ago
      I have never seen 2.5k used in the wild (gamer forums etc) so it can't be that colloquial.
- layer8 2y ago
  Actual use is inconsistent. From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2K_resolution https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2K_resolution: “In consumer products, 2560 × 1440 (1440p) is sometimes referred to as 2K, but it and similar formats are more traditionally categorized as 2.5K resolutions.” “2K” is used to denote WQHD often enough, whereas 1080p is usually called that, if not “FHD”. “2K” being used to denote resolutions lower than WQHD is really only a thing for the 2048 cinema resolutions, not for FHD.
  - declan_roberts 2y ago
    TIL
giobox 2y ago
For sure its been a sweet spot for a very long time for budget conscious gamers looking for best balance of price and frame rates, but 1440p optimized parts are nothing new. Both NVidia and AMD make parts that target 1440p display users too, and have done for years. Even previous Intel parts you can argue were tailored for 1080p/1440p use, given their comparative performance deficit at 4k etc. Assuming they retail at prices Intel are suggesting in the press releases, you maybe here save 40-50 bucks over an ~equivalent NVidia 4060. I would also argue like others here that with tech like frame gen, DLSS etc, even the cheapest discrete NVidia 40xx parts are arguably 1440p optimized now, it doesn't even need to be said in their marketing materials. Im not as familiar with AMD's range right now, but I suspect virtually every discrete graphics card they sell is "2k optmized" by the standard Intel used here, and also doesn't really warrant explicit mention.
- philistine 2y ago
  I'm baffled that PC gamers have decided that 1440p is the endgame for graphics. When I look at a 27-inch 1440p display, I see pixel edges everywhere. It's right at the edge of losing the visibility of individual pixels, since I can't perceive them at 27-inch 2160p, but not quite there yet for desktop distances. Time marches on, and I become ever more separated from gaming PC enthusiasts.
  - wing-_-nuts 2y ago
    I used to be in the '4k or bust' camp, but then I realized that I needed 1.5x scaling on a 27" display to have my UI at a comfy size. That put me right back at 1440p screen real estate and you had to deal with fractional scaling issues. Instead, I bought a good 27" 1440p monitor, and you know what? I am not the discerning connoisseur of pixels that I thought I was. Honestly, it's fine. I will hold out with this setup until I can get a 8k 144hz monitor and a gpu to drive it for a reasonable price. I expect that will take another decade or so.
    - doubled112 2y ago
      I have a 4K 43" TV on my desk and it is about perfect for me for desktop use without scaling. For gaming, I tend to turn it down to 1080p because I like frames and don't want to pay up. At 4K, it's like having 4 21" 1080p monitors. Haven't maximized or minimized a window in years. The sprawl is real.
leetharris 2y ago
I see what you're saying, but I also feel like ALL Nvidia cards are "2K" oriented cards because of DLSS, frame gen, etc. Resolution is less important now in general thanks to their upscaling tech.
laweijfmvo 2y ago
Can it compete with the massive used GPU market though? Why buy a new Intel card when I can get a used Nvidia card that I know will work well?
- teaearlgraycold 2y ago
  To some, buying used never crosses their mind.
- knowitnone 2y ago
  warranty. Plus, do you want a 2nd hand GPU that was used for cryptomining 24/7?
  - LMYahooTFY 2y ago
    Throw a new cooler on it and then yeah sure.
  - 71bw 2y ago
    >Plus, do you want a 2nd hand GPU that was used for cryptomining 24/7? ...which will be most likely in better condition than anything that was used for, let's say, gaming...
teaearlgraycold 2y ago
Please say 1440p and not 2k. Ignoring arguments about what 2k should mean, there’s enough use either way that it’s confusing.
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]

I think a graphics card tailored for 2k gaming is actually great. 2k really is the goldilocks zone between 4k and 1080p graphics before you start creeping into diminishing returns.

icegreentea2 2y ago

2k usually refers to 1080p no? The k is the approximate horizontal resolution, so 1920x1080 is definitely 2k enough.

antisthenes 2y ago
2k Usually refers to 2560x1440. 1920x1080 is 1080p. It doesn't make a whole lot of sense, but that's how it is.
- ortusdux 2y ago
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2K_resolution https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2K_resolution
  - nightski 2y ago
    That's amusing because I think almost everyone I know confuses it with 1440p. I've never heard of 2k being used for 1080p before.
  - Retric 2y ago
    “In consumer products, 2560 × 1440 (1440p) is sometimes referred to as 2K,[13] but it and similar formats are more traditionally categorized as 2.5K resolutions.”
- seritools 2y ago
  1440p is colloquially referred to as 2.5K, not 2K.
  - vundercind 2y ago
    It'd be pretty weird if it were called 2k. 1080p is in an absolute sense or as a relative "distance" to the next-lowest thousand closer to 2k pixels of width than 4k is to 4k (both are under, of course, but one's under by 80 pixels, one by 160). It's got a much better claim to the label 2k than 1440p does, and arguably a somewhat better claim to 2k than 4k has to 4k. [EDIT] I mean, of course, 1080p's also not typically called that, yet another resolution is, but labeling 1440p 2k is especially far off.
    - mkl 2y ago
      You are misunderstanding. 1080p, 1440p, 2160p refer to the number of rows of pixels, and those terms come from broadcast television and computing (the p is progressive, vs i for interlaced). 4k, 2k refer to the number of columns of pixels, and those terms come from cinema and visual effects (and originally means 4096 and 2048 pixels wide). That means 1920×1080 is both 2k and 1080p, 2560×1440 is both 2.5k and 1440p, and 3840×2160 is both 4k and 2160p.
      - vundercind 2y ago
        > You are misunderstanding. 1080p, 1440p, 2160p refer to the number of rows of pixels > (the p is progressive, vs i for interlaced) > 4k, 2k refer to the number of columns of pixels > 2560×1440 is both 2.5k and 1440p, and 3840×2160 is both 4k and 2160p. These parts I did not misunderstand. > and those terms come from cinema and visual effects (and originally means 4096 and 2048 pixels wide) OK that part I didn't know, or at least had forgotten—which are effectively the same thing, either way. > 1920×1080 is both 2k and 1080p Wikipedia suggests that in this particular case (unlike with 4k) application of "2k" to resolutions other than the original cinema resolution (2048x1080) is unusual; moreover, I was responding to a commenter's usage of "2k" as synonymous with "1440p", which seemed especially odd to me.
  - nemomarx 2y ago
    I have never seen 2.5k used in the wild (gamer forums etc) so it can't be that colloquial.
layer8 2y ago
Actual use is inconsistent. From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2K_resolution https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2K_resolution: “In consumer products, 2560 × 1440 (1440p) is sometimes referred to as 2K, but it and similar formats are more traditionally categorized as 2.5K resolutions.” “2K” is used to denote WQHD often enough, whereas 1080p is usually called that, if not “FHD”. “2K” being used to denote resolutions lower than WQHD is really only a thing for the 2048 cinema resolutions, not for FHD.
- declan_roberts 2y ago
  TIL

giobox 2y ago

For sure its been a sweet spot for a very long time for budget conscious gamers looking for best balance of price and frame rates, but 1440p optimized parts are nothing new. Both NVidia and AMD make parts that target 1440p display users too, and have done for years. Even previous Intel parts you can argue were tailored for 1080p/1440p use, given their comparative performance deficit at 4k etc. Assuming they retail at prices Intel are suggesting in the press releases, you maybe here save 40-50 bucks over an ~equivalent NVidia 4060. I would also argue like others here that with tech like frame gen, DLSS etc, even the cheapest discrete NVidia 40xx parts are arguably 1440p optimized now, it doesn't even need to be said in their marketing materials. Im not as familiar with AMD's range right now, but I suspect virtually every discrete graphics card they sell is "2k optmized" by the standard Intel used here, and also doesn't really warrant explicit mention.

philistine 2y ago
I'm baffled that PC gamers have decided that 1440p is the endgame for graphics. When I look at a 27-inch 1440p display, I see pixel edges everywhere. It's right at the edge of losing the visibility of individual pixels, since I can't perceive them at 27-inch 2160p, but not quite there yet for desktop distances. Time marches on, and I become ever more separated from gaming PC enthusiasts.
- wing-_-nuts 2y ago
  I used to be in the '4k or bust' camp, but then I realized that I needed 1.5x scaling on a 27" display to have my UI at a comfy size. That put me right back at 1440p screen real estate and you had to deal with fractional scaling issues. Instead, I bought a good 27" 1440p monitor, and you know what? I am not the discerning connoisseur of pixels that I thought I was. Honestly, it's fine. I will hold out with this setup until I can get a 8k 144hz monitor and a gpu to drive it for a reasonable price. I expect that will take another decade or so.
  - doubled112 2y ago
    I have a 4K 43" TV on my desk and it is about perfect for me for desktop use without scaling. For gaming, I tend to turn it down to 1080p because I like frames and don't want to pay up. At 4K, it's like having 4 21" 1080p monitors. Haven't maximized or minimized a window in years. The sprawl is real.

leetharris 2y ago

I see what you're saying, but I also feel like ALL Nvidia cards are "2K" oriented cards because of DLSS, frame gen, etc. Resolution is less important now in general thanks to their upscaling tech.

laweijfmvo 2y ago

Can it compete with the massive used GPU market though? Why buy a new Intel card when I can get a used Nvidia card that I know will work well?

teaearlgraycold 2y ago
To some, buying used never crosses their mind.
knowitnone 2y ago
warranty. Plus, do you want a 2nd hand GPU that was used for cryptomining 24/7?
- LMYahooTFY 2y ago
  Throw a new cooler on it and then yeah sure.
- 71bw 2y ago
  >Plus, do you want a 2nd hand GPU that was used for cryptomining 24/7? ...which will be most likely in better condition than anything that was used for, let's say, gaming...

teaearlgraycold 2y ago

Please say 1440p and not 2k. Ignoring arguments about what 2k should mean, there’s enough use either way that it’s confusing.

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]