What would you prefer? (Resolution Debate)

[Mini4President]

I made an account here, hopefully you can help me more than reddit did.

 

 

(Card / PC is able to hit the refresh rates of both on almost every single scenario, so don't worry about that)

 

 

What do you prefer?

 

-Game Rendered at 4K but later downscaled to a 1080p Screen at 75hz

 

-Game Rendered at 4K but later downscaled to a 1440p Screen at 60hz

 

 

Basically comes down to the whole "Resolution vs Framerate" debate.

 

 

144 hz sadly it is not an option, I do not have a 144 hz screen, these are separate monitors, of which run at the speeds / hz mentioned before.

Edited November 25, 2023 by Mini4President
Changed the title to a more descriptive one

[Arika]

My main question would be, why render at 4K and down sample? Why not run at native res?

 

as for the answer to your question, entirely depends on what you’re using it for. Do you NEED higher res? Or do you WANT a higher frame rate?

[Mini4President]

5 minutes ago, Arika said:

My main question would be, why render at 4K and down sample? Why not run at native res?

 

as for the answer to your question, entirely depends on what you’re using it for. Do you NEED higher res? Or do you WANT a higher frame rate?

I'm using an amd gpu, and using the "virtual super resolution" it allows me to render at a higher than native resolution to then have extra smooth graphics (super smooth AA and more detailed reflections, and [depending on the game] better texture quality)

 

I'm also using it because I noticed that (specially in games that are not *that* competitive) I could hit the refresh rates of both monitors.

 

 

 

I don't need higher fps that often, doing all of this in the first place seems to actually be biased towards quality / resolution so.... yeah

Edited November 25, 2023 by Mini4President
Actually replied to parent comment, sorry

[191x7]

1440p 60 over 1080p 75Hz every day of the week. 15Hz is not really noticeable and doesn't offer a competitive advantage.

Now, if it were 60Hz vs 100Hz or 75Hz vs 120Hz, 100 and 120 would win.

I can tell the increments of about 20-30, at least I could on CRT monitors some 15~ years ago and a couple of years ago when I tested on LCD 60 vs 75 vs 100 vs 144.

On CRT, 85 was quite better than 60Hz, 75Hz had no difference. On LCD 60-75 also feels roughly the same.

I'd rather have a faster 60Hz panel than a slower 75Hz panel.

 

[Mini4President]

6 minutes ago, 191x7 said:

1440p 60 over 1080p 75Hz every day of the week. 15Hz is not really noticeable and doesn't offer a competitive advantage.

Now, if it were 60Hz vs 100Hz or 75Hz vs 120Hz, 100 and 120 would win.

I can tell the increments of about 20-30, at least I could on CRT monitors some 15~ years ago and a couple of years ago when I tested on LCD 60 vs 75 vs 100 vs 144.

On CRT, 85 was quite better than 60Hz, 75Hz had no difference. On LCD 60-75 also feels roughly the same.

I'd rather have a faster 60Hz panel than a slower 75Hz panel.

 

Got it, thanks for your response!