Imagine you have a graphics card with which one is about as demanding as the other. Which do you choose? 1080p rays or 2160p no rays.
Depends on the game I guess. Games that require more input, native res with no RT for more FPS. Games that actually showcases raytracing or are slower games? I'd use 1440p/4K with RT on.
Can i cheat? 4K using FSR so it renders internally at 1080P and upscales :P.
Hard to choose between the 2. I play on a 43" monitor so 1080P can be quite blurry. But Pretty lights and shiny reflections!
In saying that i played Quake 2 RTX and, well, 4K native ain't happening on a 6900XT....on Linux (the RT support on Linux is still very much a work in progress). Still it didn't look bad when rendering at 1080P internally. The main problem was more prominent artefacts from the denoiser. But....that's still Quake 2 at the end of the day.
In reality I would look for a balance of visuals/performance i am happy with. Like using FSR/DLSS. Maybe use only some RT settings rather than all of them (if possible). RT reflections would be the main one for me.
If i was using consoles though i would always leave it on quality mode rather than performance.
Imagine you have a graphics card with which one is about as demanding as the other. Which do you choose? 1080p rays or 2160p no rays.
A lower resolution is no guarantee of better performance with RT enabled you know. The reason being is because RT is not 100% dependant on a good GPU, it needs an equally a good CPU as well.
On my tired (soon to be retired) i7 8700 and RTX 3070, enabling RT on game a such as Cyberpunk adds a further 20-25% workload on my CPU.
Apologies if you already knew this, but discussions regarding RT on these forums always talk about the power of the GPU and pretty much ignore the CPU.
My new PC (which I didn't build this time) is coming in a few days. It's an i5 13600K, 32GB RAM and an RTX 3080. Now I won't be playing max settings or anything like that, that's just stupid. But I will be trying different settings to get 50-60fps on my RT games with at least 1440P. Fun times!
DLSS and FSR look weird...
Must be something wrong with your eyes then. Cyberpunk with 4K performance mode (1080P) looks pretty much as good as real 4K.
Unless I'm doing something wrong, not even close. FSR looks much more pixelated and soft. Don't have the Nvidia card installed anymore.
DLSS and FSR look weird...
Must be something wrong with your eyes then. Cyberpunk with 4K performance mode (1080P) looks pretty much as good as real 4K.
Unless I'm doing something wrong, not even close. FSR looks much more pixelated and soft. Don't have the Nvidia card installed anymore.
If you are using FSR then make sure you are using FSR Quality mode. FSR performance (especially for titles that use FSR 1) is quite poor and not recommended.
I tried it a bit (Quality mode) in Horizon Zero Dawn and looks fine when stepping up to 4K.
A mix of temporal super-sampling, variable resolution, and image upscaling offers the best balance to performance and visual fidelity. RT or not I'd take a balance mode over native 4K anyday.
DLSS and FSR look weird...
Must be something wrong with your eyes then. Cyberpunk with 4K performance mode (1080P) looks pretty much as good as real 4K.
Unless I'm doing something wrong, not even close. FSR looks much more pixelated and soft. Don't have the Nvidia card installed anymore.
If you are using FSR then make sure you are using FSR Quality mode. FSR performance (especially for titles that use FSR 1) is quite poor and not recommended.
I tried it a bit (Quality mode) in Horizon Zero Dawn and looks fine when stepping up to 4K.
That's what I did and it looked like shit compared to Bond's screenshots. Really fucking annoying that Gamespot no longer allows uploads over 3 MB. No, I'm not gonna compress my 4K/FHD FSR Horizon screenshot comparison, because I shouldn't have to.
If DLSS and FSR isn't an option I'll play at 1440p. Although 4K DLSS Performance mode actually looks pretty decent and on par if not better than 1440p DLSS quality mode.
@Bond007uk: why upgrade from a 3070 to a 3080? Should have gone for something more substantial honestly.
4K over 1080p with RT.
1440p/60fps is my minimum. I wouldn't use RT if it dropped me below that and I prefer 80fps as the minimum for a FPS game. I haven't bothered with 1080p for many years. Having a 4090 means I generally don't have to worry about anything. Just crank that shit to the max! 1440p, ultrawide, 4K... All good. :)
4K over 1080p with RT.
1440p/60fps is my minimum. I wouldn't use RT if it dropped me below that and I prefer 80fps as the minimum for a FPS game. I haven't bothered with 1080p for many years. Having a 4090 means I generally don't have to worry about anything. Just crank that shit to the max! 1440p, ultrawide, 4K... All good. :)
Some SW enjoyers main the S as their only system. Others have a 1070 and pretend to be all about performance over graphics. This is System Wars.
Able to get 4k but generally don't give a shit about it.
Same with ray-tracing.
Grew up watching pirated VHS tapes, my standards are extremely low.
4K over 1080p with RT.
1440p/60fps is my minimum. I wouldn't use RT if it dropped me below that and I prefer 80fps as the minimum for a FPS game. I haven't bothered with 1080p for many years. Having a 4090 means I generally don't have to worry about anything. Just crank that shit to the max! 1440p, ultrawide, 4K... All good. :)
Some SW enjoyers main the S as their only system. Others have a 1070 and pretend to be all about performance over graphics. This is System Wars.
Well, I can't speak for others, only for myself. I don't bullshit people on here. I generally tell it like it is... or at least how I see it. People may not agree with me or think I am an elitist or whatever, but that is fine. I care about quality and I know the majority of people do not really care about quality. They are OK with the basic bitch experience. All I can say is... if you follow my recommendations, you too can experience quality gaming.
Obviously, I will never recommend a Series Shit. LOL
4K over 1080p with RT.
1440p/60fps is my minimum. I wouldn't use RT if it dropped me below that and I prefer 80fps as the minimum for a FPS game. I haven't bothered with 1080p for many years. Having a 4090 means I generally don't have to worry about anything. Just crank that shit to the max! 1440p, ultrawide, 4K... All good. :)
Some SW enjoyers main the S as their only system. Others have a 1070 and pretend to be all about performance over graphics. This is System Wars.
Well, I can't speak for others, only for myself. I don't bullshit people on here. I generally tell it like it is... or at least how I see it. People may not agree with me or think I am an elitist or whatever, but that is fine. I care about quality and I know the majority of people do not really care about quality. They are OK with the basic bitch experience. All I can say is... if you follow my recommendations, you too can experience quality gaming.
Obviously, I will never recommend a Series Shit. LOL
Lots of basic bitch gamers on SW. Genuinely disgusting.
1080p is way too low. 1440p minimum. But it is pretty tough noticing the difference between 1440p and 4K, even with a 77" OLED.
4K over 1080p with RT.
1440p/60fps is my minimum. I wouldn't use RT if it dropped me below that and I prefer 80fps as the minimum for a FPS game. I haven't bothered with 1080p for many years. Having a 4090 means I generally don't have to worry about anything. Just crank that shit to the max! 1440p, ultrawide, 4K... All good. :)
Choices are best, if you can choose 4K, ultra wide screen, high framerates, high settings, ray tracing... That's living.
I love PC gaming. I can choose to play older games, crank them up to 4K and install graphics mods. Means I don't have to play modern games with their trash microtransactions 😎
I have RTX 4090. I can do both now: 4K and RT 😎
Living the good life. I'm right there with ya, buddy! This 4090 is insane.
I used to have 4k monitor, I broke it with an index controller and then decided to get an ultrawide 1440p as a temp monitor before finding another 4k one at a decent price. I ended up sticking with the 1440p monitor in the end because I couldn't tell any difference in the fidelity even at just a few feet away from the monitor and the performance gain from not playing in 4k is HUGE. IMO 4k is a waste of performance, id take well done RT over it any day of the week and probably even the half arsed RT they put in AMD sponsored/console games too.
I used to have 4k monitor, I broke it with an index controller and then decided to get an ultrawide 1440p as a temp monitor before finding another 4k one at a decent price. I ended up sticking with the 1440p monitor in the end because I couldn't tell any difference in the fidelity even at just a few feet away from the monitor and the performance gain from not playing in 4k is HUGE. IMO 4k is a waste of performance, id take well done RT over it any day of the week and probably even the half arsed RT they put in AMD sponsored/console games too.
I agree that 4K is probably a waste of performance when using a monitor. But TVs are bigger and sat farther away from. I don't use 4K with many new games. Been using 1440 to 2160 FSR the last few days and it's alright. But the option for native 4K when the game is easy to run is nice.
Please Log In to post.
Log in to comment