Anyone downgrade native res to improve performance?

[happy medium]

I would never go back to 1920x1080. Having 2.39x more pixels on my main screen means I can be that much more productive.

I use my computer to play games, use Kodi, go on the web, and a little encoding.
I was just as productive with my 19" Trinitron as I am with my 40 inch monitor.
The difference is now I can sit 5 or 7 feet away in comfort and do the same thing instead of being 2 feet from my monitor and at a desk.

At 6 or 7 feet away its much harder to tell the difference between 1080p and 4k but there is a slight difference. Is that difference worth 3x the money? I think not.
My point is what happens after 4k? Will our eyes suddenly be able to see the difference between 4k and 8k to justify upgrading?

 

[dogen1]

I would never go back to 1920x1080. Having 2.39x more pixels on my main screen means I can be that much more productive.

Is it more clarity that helps you? Or screenspace?

Cause more screenspace makes me less productive lol.

 

[tential]

Hahaha. Well with some people saying 1080p + HDR looks better than 1440p without HDR it's got me curious. I'm sick of spending $400+ on graphics cards nearly every year. Some of it was me buying a new card that I didn't need, but I don't see the price trends reversing...ever. AMD has perhaps permanently fallen behind Nvidia's release cadence, especially at the higher end. 225mm2 chips generally just don't cut it at 1440p resolution at the start of their product life, if at all.

I love the pixel density. I think that it's still worth it to buy the fastest TI chip at release and sell your old Nvidia chip. Same with AMD to a lesser extent, and a different strategy may need to be employed. Combined with mining and other techniques, it's not too expensive to keep the top of the line GPU.
4K is good just for pure MONITOR use. The 32 inch fills my tiny desk completely, but the real estate I have for doing things is amazing. People ALWAYS resist technological improvements. 4K is better in every aspect. It was only $380 for my QNIX monitor, so I figured if it sucked.... I've spent far more money on extravagantly useless things.

I can't speak to the 1440p vs 1080p. But 4K is definitely a big enough jump to be happy. With the koreans undercutting the global market heavily, it's a GREAT time to try a 4K monitor.

I don't think prices can rise forever. They will rise at the high end until we figure out what the real price demand is for a high end GPU which still we realize is higher and higher at launch than we first though.
But the value will soon need to be there vs the consoles, or the consoles will start to swing people back if GPU prices rise overall.

ALSO, look at something like the 470 crossfire right now. That's arguable the most POTENTIAL gpu horsepower per dollar you can get. If high end prices keep rising, BOTH vendors will need to cut multicard configs, or people will simply enjoy their multicard configuration as it's still far cheaper than the high end rig they'll never afford.

Edit:
Also when people say you can't notice the difference...
Again this is why I love China/Korea. I can buy something at 1/3 price or whatever and just test for myself. Do I need a surfacebook? I'll buy the knock off from China and see how much I use it. Not much.... I guess I don't need a surface.
Still a 4K monitor is just nice for the eye candy games even, a cheap one being available is a nice option.

 

[happy medium]

ALSO, look at something like the 470 crossfire right now.

NO thanks, it no good,as far as I can tell. The minimums are terrible.
http://www.gamersnexus.net/guides/2547-amd-rx-470-crossfire-benchmark-vs-rx-480-and-1070

http://www.eteknix.com/amd-rx-470-crossfire-graphics-card-review/7/

 

[ZGR]

1920x1080 on 3840x2160 looks terribly blurry. It has to be native resolution or else it is time for a new GPU.

 

[Eric1987]

I've been gaming at max settings 4k for a while now it isn't 3-4 years away.

 

[13Gigatons]

1920x1080 on 3840x2160 looks terribly blurry. It has to be native resolution or else it is time for a new GPU.

I'm viewing this at 1920 x 1080 on a 4k monitor and the text is crisp. The scale is set at 100%. I was worried about this issue but it seems to be working fine. I prefer everything be running at 4k but need a new video card for that.....soon.

 

[tential]

I'm viewing this at 1920 x 1080 on a 4k monitor and the text is crisp. The scale is set at 100%. I was worried about this issue but it seems to be working fine. I prefer everything be running at 4k but need a new video card for that.....soon

Same, text was crisp. But I only used 1080p since my monitor needs a DP connnection for 4K 60hz. 4K is just better due to the amount of screen real estate I get. It's just better all around. 4K resolution is a huge improvement to me in usability.

 

[13Gigatons]

Same, text was crisp. But I only used 1080p since my monitor needs a DP connection for 4K 60hz. 4K is just better due to the amount of screen real estate I get. It's just better all around. 4K resolution is a huge improvement to me in usability.

I pretty much hated 1080 on the PC and am looking forward to 4k becoming standard. The extra screen real estate is the big reason for me as well.

Now in the Home Theater, I can live with 1080p for a bit longer because I sit 12' away and have a hard time telling the difference.

 

[crisium]

Absolutely not.

Non-native res on an LCD is bad. The exception may be 1080 on a 4K display with proper 4:1 pixel mapping, but for my 1440p no way am I going 1280x720 and going fulls screen 1080 is unacceptable.

I did enjoy doing this on CRTs, but those days are dead.

 

[Rifter]

I have 2 monitors, a 1440p and a 1080p. I usually game on the 1440p, but if i need to step down the res ill just use my other monitor.

 

[monkeydelmagico]

I'd turn down the game settings before turning down the resolution.

 

[dogen1]

Sometimes I'll turn down the res while playing older games to add to the look. When I recently played halo 1, I ran it at 480p iirc.

I don't do it for performance, just for visual consistency. If it's a modern game that's supposed to be sharp and highly detailed I usually don't.

 

[CakeMonster]

Did it scale by itself to full res or did it mess up your desktop and windows when running it in lower resolution? That's what I can't stomach..

 

[IEC]

I just upgraded to 4K. Such color. Much real estate. Calibrated to 100% sRGB. Seems to be a *VA panel based on black blacks.

 

[Insomniator]

From my experience, turning settings down from OMG EPIC ULTRA to... medium/high will raise performance dramatically without any real noticeable image quality loss unless you study screenshots. Just don't let your girlfriend know you can't run games on max, she might leave you for someone with a bigger e-peen.

So in any case, 1440p at medium > 1080 ultra all day. Lower settings before lowering monitor quality.

 

[tential]

From my experience, turning settings down from OMG EPIC ULTRA to... medium/high will raise performance dramatically without any real noticeable image quality loss unless you study screenshots. Just don't let your girlfriend know you can't run games on max, she might leave you for someone with a bigger e-peen.

So in any case, 1440p at medium > 1080 ultra all day. Lower settings before lowering monitor quality.

Ya I went from unplayable fps in overwatch to 80-90 fps at 4k by playing at low settings and I can't tell the difference without studying

 

[Sonikku]

I just upgraded to 4K. Such color. Much real estate. Calibrated to 100% sRGB. Seems to be a *VA panel based on black blacks.

I need to calibrate my color and I don't have a meter that the professionals use. Any suggestions?

 

[Bacon1]

I need to calibrate my color and I don't have a meter that the professionals use. Any suggestions?

If you don't want to pay the money to use one of the external tools best option is to use a website to help calibrate it.

http://www.lagom.nl/lcd-test/

 

[Sonikku]

And how much are the external tools?

 

[Rifter]

And how much are the external tools?

it varies alot, $200-1000. I didnt want to spend on one either, luckily i know a guy who has one as he does photo work for a living and get him to calibrate my new displays for some pizza and beer lol. Although after all these years of doing that i probably could have purchased a calibrator.

 

[IEC]

I need to calibrate my color and I don't have a meter that the professionals use. Any suggestions?

I use a Spyder 5 Pro. It was on sale at B&H Photo for $99 shipped a while back. Seemed to be the sweet spot for value outside of professional usage that still yields consistent and accurate color profiles. Given two monitors with equal color capabilities (both 8-bit IPS, 100% sRGB), they came out looking the same to my eye.

 

[cbn]

I'd probably just play in windowed mode at a lower resolution if I couldn't turn down the game's graphics settings enough.

Yes, windowed mode would work if the game supports it. I forgot about that one.

I really don't have a desire to do a window mode and sacrifice image size.

Yesterday I picked up a game (Deus Ex Mankind Divided) that finally forced my GTX 660 out of 1080p and when I ran the game at 1440 x 900 low settings the diagonal of window was only 16.6" (This on a 21.5" 1080p monitor).

And quite frankly it is almost too small of an image. So yes, I agree.

Therefore at this point I would definitely rather have a secondary monitor with less pixels per inch if I needed to run sub 1080p again. This to make the image larger.

 

[crisium]

I'd take that as a sign to upgrade!

 

[VirtualLarry]

1920x1080 on 3840x2160 looks terribly blurry. It has to be native resolution or else it is time for a new GPU.

Not at all. Looks just fine, on my Avera 40" 4K UHD TV.