As for launch availability, this should embarrass AMD. After watching NVidia's limited stock release I think that AMD's was much, much worse. I guess the hope is that follow on stock comes in faster, or AIB partners are cranking out something right now that makes up for the utter lack of product. As the HWC Twitter on the side bar shows, the stock levels were near zero everywhere.
I'd compare more with 1440p. I have a few ultrawide screens, a pair of 35" 3440x1440 ones, and a freak 43" 3840x1200 one. Either of those is a LOT less pixels than 4k if you do the math:
3840 x 2160 = 8,294,400 pixels
3440 x 1440 = 4,953,600 pixels
2560 x 1440 = 3,686,400 pixels
Freak 3840 x 1200 = 4,608,000 pixels
So you can see how much of a jump up 4K is in terms of pixel count, so I treat 4K benchmarks on their own, and not as something that 'scales' normally with resolution increases. Just my opinion though.
Agree with you, its often overlooked. That resolution increase is a 34% increase in pixels pushed!Thanks, your opinion is valued, and it adds perspective. I wasn't sure where the ultras fall with respect to how many more pixels a card has to push. Still, the jump in pixel count from 2560x1440 to 3440x1440 would likely be enough to notice a minor decrease in frame performance. Quite interesting!