Of course, a lot depends on what games you like to play. Anyway, we’ll find out soon enough (in the next few months). Generally, the min spec assumes playing at fairly low quality levels. I want something far better than that.
Yes Ryzen is fine, I mean the older AMD CPUs (thats why I said “unless we talk Ryzen” 
1 Like
Ashes of the singularity can give some nice benchmarkes, if you have it (none VR). It shows the bottleneck quite good. For high resolution the MoBo, CPU, RAM and GPU need to fit in terms that the mobo architecture can move the amount of data needed between all components engaged in rendering/ calculating your game - worst case could be that the lanes of cpu/ram can’t push alle the data an 1180ti need and so leave some performance unused.
as a matter of fact I changed my pledge to an 8k from initial 5k two days after. I have lots of experience with upscaling and I thought if they do it right it will increase the quality very much. ok, far from native resolution but definitely very noticeable IF done right/ the results of upscaling experience that I have so far.
3 Likes
btw if you have a decent rig + 4k monitor you can test it yourself. need to do a little digging though, check out mpc hq + madvr. Or if it‘s too much check Linus on upscaling cable.
1 Like
I also changed my pledge from 5K to 8K, after I decided that stretching the image would make the individual pixels less obvious.
2 Likes
Actually I sticked to the 5k because I had bad experiences with upscalers in TV sets and I thought there is hardly better detail than what my brain would make out of native non washed resolution. So my second thought was if at all necessary I use a super sampled input to get all the details I need and save the money for a GPU.
atm it looks like the only drawback of the 8k will be 10hz. Only a personal 1:1 comparison will tell at the end, most likely won’t find out for long long time…
2 Likes
Yeah, I was torn. The plus side (for you) is that you will get 90 Hz refresh. If I had known that during the Kickstarter, I might have stuck with the 5K.
My 4K monitor does a great job of scaling up 2560x1440 content, which is what the 8K will do. That’s a “easy” upscaling and shouldn’t smear details too badly.
1 Like
There is a 1180ti comparison possible with this one if it is true - got the link from a hardware site …
Edit
It’s a 1180ti supposedly…
Source was
https://www.technochops.com/nvidia-geforce-gtx-2080-1180-ti-benchmark-leaked-on-ashes-of-the-singularity/11470/
1 Like
Interesting, according to this post *,
“If you can run your 4k monitor games at: (14450688/8294400)*90 = 157 FPS
…then you should be able to drive the Pimax 8k with a 1.0 supersample.”
That’s quite close to my 160 fps suggestion.
[update] I have real concerns about my 980Ti. I tried numerous tweaks to my 4K settings and Elite Dangerous seemed to get stuck at a max of 120 fps no matter what I tried (even SS at 0.5). I did see peaks of 180, but only while looking at empty space. I’m beginning to worry about the rest of my system. I have an older i7 with 16 GB ram, which I thought would be OK, but I’m now wondering if it’s a bottleneck.
2 Likes
I think its pretty much irrelevant. Lengthy BS calculations to come in the end to the same conclusions as i did.
a) he make his claim about 4k 160FPS for super sampling factor 1.4 (1.0 Vive setting)
I already said we won’t really need super sampling. Super sampling is necessary on Vive and Oculus because of the relatively low display resolution combined with a diamond shaped sub pixel pattern, the typical draw back of OLEDs. We will see how CLPL works, it should be a lot easier to drive IMO.
b) there is no linearity in scaling between different resolutions vs. fps. That is just naive fallacy. There are many factors that need to be considered, like the large stereo overlap in Pimax8k, or the necessity to use forward rendering instead of deferred rendering, we can just guesstimate.
c) he makes is disclaimer right at the end “So obviously this is just a really rough estimate” you should take that one seriously.
Finally - to really end this useless discussion for my part - I gave a recommendation to look at GPUs benchmarks what they are capable of at full 4k resolution in minimum FPS. The simple reason is GPUs (also CPUs) compare somewhat different in that criteria when compared to lets say avg. FPS at full HD.
But sure - everybody is free to wait for a GPU that fulfills expectations of up to a 160 FPS at 4k 
I simply don’t care, nobody should do.
Unfortunately, even at 4K, Elite Dangerous looks like crap without SS. Frankly, it needs higher than 2.0, which is the max supported in-game. Of course, my system doesn’t run well at 2.0, so I use 1.25.
What monitor are you using Neal? Just tried Elite on my 4K projector. Looks fantastic! Scale is massive but still not as immersive as VR
1 Like
I’ve got an Asus MG28UQ Black 28" 1ms (GTG) 4K UHD Adaptive-Sync (Free Sync) Gaming Monitor, 3840 x 2160. Elite looks fine in space, but the alias crawlies in a station look TERRIBLE. This is a big issue for me, since it just ruins the experience of “being there”.
1 Like
Wow u got an 4k projector?? I may consider switching from TV to projector when the 4ks are getting affordable, they are insanely expensive given that you get a decent full HD below 1k$ already. But my guess it that they keep on beeing that pricy for a while.
1 Like
Consider 4k panel with backlight removed & an overhead projector. 