Battlefield 4 unplayable at 200% resolution scale?

[BrightCandle]

Back in the day of the original GeForce we didn't have the cheaper and altogether worse Antialiasing techniques we do today. We had SSAA and that was it. 4x AA was relatively common back in the day and it looked lovely. Of course now we have gone through MSAA (not as good but a lot cheaper) through to FXAA (very cheap algorithm but very blurry and poor AA) and quite a few steps inbetween. Peoples expectations for AA quality have been progressively dropping over the years as the old expensive techniques got replaced with faster implementations that did a reasonable job.

For me TXAA and techniques like it that try to take away the shimmer will be the next big change in AA, because the current systems look awful in motion quite often.

 

[RUN4Y0URL1F3]

Resolution scaling is downsampling or OGSSAA. Of course it isn't playable at 200%. I wouldn't expect it to be playable at 125%.

This is one of those settings that will never be maxed out, maybe in 2 years or something. OGSSAA (which is what resolution scaling is) is incredibly GPU intensive. Don't expect to use this setting with no performance hit. Most people should not use resolution scale at all - again, INCREDIBLY GPU intensive.

I'm maxing it out in Battlefield 4 as I write this and I get 75 FPS average all maxed out without MSAA.
I play every game using 4x SSAA.

 

[RUN4Y0URL1F3]

Back in the day of the original GeForce we didn't have the cheaper and altogether worse Antialiasing techniques we do today. We had SSAA and that was it. 4x AA was relatively common back in the day and it looked lovely. Of course now we have gone through MSAA (not as good but a lot cheaper) through to FXAA (very cheap algorithm but very blurry and poor AA) and quite a few steps inbetween. Peoples expectations for AA quality have been progressively dropping over the years as the old expensive techniques got replaced with faster implementations that did a reasonable job.

For me TXAA and techniques like it that try to take away the shimmer will be the next big change in AA, because the current systems look awful in motion quite often.

I quite like TXAA myself.

Can you please have a look at my question and reply when you have a second?

 

[dougp]

I'm maxing it out in Battlefield 4 as I write this and I get 75 FPS average all maxed out without MSAA.
I play every game using 4x SSAA.

You're using 200% resolution scale? What resolution? I mean, you have almost $1500 worth of video card, guess you need to put it to use.

 

[RUN4Y0URL1F3]

You're using 200% resolution scale? What resolution? I mean, you have almost $1500 worth of video card, guess you need to put it to use.

I play at 1080p. I've decided to skip 1440p altogether and go for 4K directly. I don't feel like spending £3000 for a monitor right now though!

 

[Paul98]

Though I can't play at all these different resolution scales, I wanted to test it out and see what the effect was. I must say things looked a good bit better even at 125%, and great at 150% I had a hard time noticing a difference between that and 200% even with the huge performance hit. I also tried different settings with MSAA. The results were different, heck trying x4msaa and 200% resolution crashed my game haha. Those settings can be changed in game and they will change automatically, no need to reload to see those differences. I would suggest you try out a few different settings see what looks best along with good performance.

 

[Illz81]

200% is playable on my Titan Black on 1080p resolution. 45fps avg frames and will dip into the low 30s in big cutscenes.

 

[sonofhendrix]

I can't believe all you Nvidia owners suffering from such slow performance. There has to be some major bottleneck somewhere.

I use a 2560x1440p monitor. This is the starting resolution. In BF4 i can run it upto 200% resolution scaling(above 4K) it looks incredible. To make this playable i turn off HBAO and also turn of deferred AA, post AA can handle low but keep it off.
I estimate my frame rate to be above 25FPS.

My specs are simply,
Corei5 3570k at 4.4Ghz
8GB DDR4
HD7970 3GB at 1500mhz memory and 1050 core
Hazro 27" 2560x1440 monitor.
DX11.1


On an added note, in 64bit AMD mantle mode, the performance drops immensely when resolution scaling.

 

[sonofhendrix]

200% is playable on my Titan Black on 1080p resolution. 45fps avg frames and will dip into the low 30s in big cutscenes.

Trust me when i say my HD7970 can do that. what do i have to do to prove it?

 

[tential]

Trust me when i say my HD7970 can do that. what do i have to do to prove it?

Not respond to a thread that's been dead for 6 months?
Edit: Or post a FRAPS of you playing at 200% scaling...

Not hard

 

[PrincessFrosty]

I'm not that familiar with this scaling value in BF4, but if I had to guess this function is rendering the game at a higher resolution and then downsampling the result to the native resolution of your monitor?

In which case it's acting like Super Sampled Anti-Aliasing (SSAA), when you set 200% as your scaling you're setting the resolution of a 1920x1080p screen to be that of twice the height and twice the width (3840x2160) otherwise known as UHD or 4k.

The problem with resolution scaling is that 200% the amount is multiplied by 2 because resolution is an area defined by widthxheight so if you double both you quadruple the total area, in this case it's 4x the pixel count. Most games the strain on the GPU is somewhat roughly scaled with the number of pixels rendered.

UHD 9(4k) is still a very hard res to push, so is 2xSSAA (essentially the same thing for 1080p), this is the sort of thing only realistically possible for much older, and less demanding games.

Consider running at 100% scaling and then applying some other less itensive form of AA like MSAA or if you're insane FX/SMAA.

 

[skipsneeky2]

I was watching a few youtube videos,you pretty much need tri sli 780tis to deliver a all out 200% scale maxed out ultra experience @1440p while staying well above 60fps.I remember one video where the usage was well over 80% on all 3 gpus.

People say a third card doesn't scale well,it seems from that video you just slam 200% resolution scale and it gets used just as much as the other 2.Idk how many are insane enough to have 3 cards for the pleasure of resolution scale at 200%.

I guess Adam47k or someone with a uber rig could back up my claims,i know 200% even at 768p for me with my 2gb 770 is out of the question as my performance horribly drops at 150% and i hit my vram wall at about 175% lol.

 

[menaceR32]

Sorry for the necro of this old thread but I see no one answered your question.

I don't have a standard display, so this may not be a straight up answer either. I'm running a 3440x1440p. It's a curved UltraWide 1440p IPS panel with 5ms latency.

The rig has 2 GTX 980s water cooled and overclocked by a lot.

I play BF4 maxed out at my native resolution. In order to keep the FPS at 60+ I have to keep the resolution scale anywhere between 130-150% depending on the level.

At 200% my VRAM usage is capped out at over 4000 MB and the FPS dips down to the 20-30 FPS range.

 

[PrincessFrosty]

+200% scale is rendering the resolution at twice the width and height which is the equivalent of running the game on a 4k UHD monitor (plus a little extra overhead to down sample it)

It's better to use some form of Anti-Aliasing which has a similar effect but is way more optimized.