1440p/4k to 1080p, should companies tell us ALL supported resolutions?

[Arduous11213]

Can we have that?? And I'd like to know if gsync and or adaptive sync will maintain it's speed if I decided to change the resolution. 

 

Makes me believe somebody cuts corners, i guess literally now..

[Hinjima]

5 minutes ago, Arduous11213 said:

Can we have that?? And I'd like to know if gsync and or adaptive sync will maintain it's speed if I decided to change the resolution. 

 

Makes me believe somebody cuts corners, i guess literally now..

What are you actually talking about here?

You mean system requirements for games?

Most games support over 20 different resolutions..

[podkall]

Doesn't G-sync only work on G-sync certified monitors? (there must be some 4K monitors with G-sync, or at least 1440p)

 

 

[Hinjima]

Just now, podkall said:

Doesn't G-sync only work on G-sync certified monitors? (there must be some 4K monitors with G-sync, or at least 1440p)

 

 

Plenty of 1440p and 4k monitors with Gsync indeed, even more that are Gsync Compatible.

[podkall]

Just now, Hinjima said:

Plenty of 1440p and 4k monitors with Gsync indeed, even more that are Gsync Compatible.

my initial comment was almost that,

 

you don't really need G-sync on 4K monitors, it's much more useful when talking high Hz and fps, which doesn't really rhyme with 4K resolution.

[Eigenvektor]

25 minutes ago, Hinjima said:

What are you actually talking about here?

I'm guessing they may be talking about the resolutions supported by the monitor itself? Because the mention of G-Sync maintaining its speed makes me think they mean supported monitor refresh rates for different resolutions.

 

Of course, higher resolution typically means lower performance from the GPU and with Adaptive Sync doing its thing that means the refresh rate will naturally go down as the game run slower. Assuming that is what OP means…

 

OP, you really need to provide more context.

[jaslion]

1 hour ago, podkall said:

Doesn't G-sync only work on G-sync certified monitors? (there must be some 4K monitors with G-sync, or at least 1440p)

 

 

Actual Gsync monitors are nearpy non existant now tho. Its mainly gsync compatible these days aka vesa standard adaptive sync

[Mihle]

On 3/16/2024 at 7:23 PM, podkall said:

my initial comment was almost that,

 

you don't really need G-sync on 4K monitors, it's much more useful when talking high Hz and fps, which doesn't really rhyme with 4K resolution.

VRR is very useful no matter what Hz you are talking about, as long as the monitor supports VRR at that Hz.

Doesn't matter if it's 60hz max or 120hz max, it's still very useful and I would dislike not having it.

[Stahlmann]

You can run practically any resolution under your native resolution. I have yet to see a 4K monitor that cannot do 1600p, 1440p 1080p 720p, 768p, etc. And since there are very limited use cases for running non-native other than more fps in games, I'd don't see a point in every monitor having hundreds of supported resolutions and refresh rates on their spec sheets.

 

The biggest impact on how these resolutions are displayed is probably the scaling setting in your GPU driver.

[podkall]

11 hours ago, Mihle said:

VRR is very useful no matter what Hz you are talking about, as long as the monitor supports VRR at that Hz.

Doesn't matter if it's 60hz max or 120hz max, it's still very useful and I would dislike not having it.

I guess, but on 60Hz you can barely see screen tearing even you're exceeding the Monitor's Hz on unlocked fps

[Mihle]

16 hours ago, podkall said:

I guess, but on 60Hz you can barely see screen tearing even you're exceeding the Monitor's Hz on unlocked fps

I disagree with that.

[podkall]

9 hours ago, Mihle said:

I disagree with that.

feel free to disagree, screen tearing is much more prominent on displays with higher Hz, because the tearing can get caught between the high Hz

 

on 60Hz monitor, it's possible to have potential tearing, only the monitor is so slow before it tears it's rendering another frame again

[Mihle]

13 hours ago, podkall said:

feel free to disagree, screen tearing is much more prominent on displays with higher Hz, because the tearing can get caught between the high Hz

 

on 60Hz monitor, it's possible to have potential tearing, only the monitor is so slow before it tears it's rendering another frame again

I don't know if I quite understand what you are saying, but I am quite sure that is not how it works. If a monitor is sent a frame before it completes the previous, it is sent a frame before it completes the previous. No matter what frequency it is.

 

If anything, a tear stays on a 60hz screen for longer time than it does on a high frequency screen, and therefore can be more noticeable. Aka on for example 240hz it will be less visible because its just on screen for a very short time.

[Stahlmann]

20 minutes ago, Mihle said:

I don't know if I quite understand what you are saying, but I am quite sure that is not how it works. If a monitor is sent a frame before it completes the previous, it is sent a frame before it completes the previous. No matter what frequency it is.

 

If anything, a tear stays on a 60hz screen for longer time than it does on a high frequency screen, and therefore can be more noticeable. Aka on for example 240hz it will be less visible because its just on screen for a very short time.

13 hours ago, podkall said:

feel free to disagree, screen tearing is much more prominent on displays with higher Hz, because the tearing can get caught between the high Hz

 

on 60Hz monitor, it's possible to have potential tearing, only the monitor is so slow before it tears it's rendering another frame again

 

The general consensus is that VRR is less important on high refresh rate displays and high frame rate games because it's less noticeable the higher you go. Like @Mihle already said, that's because the image tear is visible for a smaller amount of time.

 

Especially on lower refresh rates like 120 Hz or less, VRR is much more important, as tearing is extremely noticeable when it happens.

 

Case in point: I recently played around with the Nvidia settings and within the first 10 seconds of starting the next game, I could tell that VRR wasn't working. Especially when you've been used to G-Sync for years, you will be able to spot tearing instantly.

[podkall]

10 hours ago, Mihle said:

I don't know if I quite understand what you are saying, but I am quite sure that is not how it works. If a monitor is sent a frame before it completes the previous, it is sent a frame before it completes the previous. No matter what frequency it is.

 

If anything, a tear stays on a 60hz screen for longer time than it does on a high frequency screen, and therefore can be more noticeable. Aka on for example 240hz it will be less visible because its just on screen for a very short time.

nah I don't think that's how it works, because I know my display and I'm not that oblivious to screen tears, because I get those

 

let me explain why

10 hours ago, Stahlmann said:

 

The general consensus is that VRR is less important on high refresh rate displays and high frame rate games because it's less noticeable the higher you go. Like @Mihle already said, that's because the image tear is visible for a smaller amount of time.

 

Especially on lower refresh rates like 120 Hz or less, VRR is much more important, as tearing is extremely noticeable when it happens.

 

Case in point: I recently played around with the Nvidia settings and within the first 10 seconds of starting the next game, I could tell that VRR wasn't working. Especially when you've been used to G-Sync for years, you will be able to spot tearing instantly.

so @Stahlmann the reason why I'm not 100% agreeing with @Mihle sounds little bit complicated but let me explain,

 

yes, obviously a high Hz display is very fast so that it removes the torn frame and displays new clean one maybe,

 

unless that one gets torn aswell, now you might be asking how a low Hz monitor can beat a display that can quickly get rid of the screen torn image,

 

but that's the thing, getting rid of the torn image is only half the battle won, the thing about 60Hz monitors is while they can suffer from screen tearing, they're also very slow,

 

now obviously in many aspects that's also a bad thing, and doesn't really help the low Hz monitor, but one small thing it has it's that it's so slow, it's not eager to get another frame from the GPU, because it's either too early for the frame to be replaced already for example,

 

it might be also that if it tears at the top and you focus at the middle that it might simply be left unnoticed because you're focusing for example, but I generally feel like while high Hz monitors get rid of torn frames fast, they can also pick up even more tearing because of their high response design,

 

that's just how I feel, but I feel like it's pretty accurate.

[Arduous11213]

On 3/16/2024 at 2:20 PM, Hinjima said:

What are you actually talking about here?

You mean system requirements for games?

Most games support over 20 different resolutions..

Don't you think it seems diffy~ (different) that we'd rely solely on the video game's resolution, to change resolution? im just curious, if i set a 4k 144hz display to 1080p 144hz, is the higher hertz even available? I mean, im guessing i don't see why it shouldnt be, but to more end the question on the subject this time, why can't we have all supported resolutions on the amazon store front?

[Hinjima]

4 minutes ago, Arduous11213 said:

Don't you think it seems diffy~ (different) that we'd rely solely on the video game's resolution, to change resolution? im just curious, if i set a 4k 144hz display to 1080p 144hz, is the higher hertz even available? I mean, im guessing i don't see why it shouldnt be, but to more end the question on the subject this time, why can't we have all supported resolutions on the amazon store front?

Cables used and what type of HDMI port and Displayport could also be a limiting factor.
I'm not quite sure what you mean by supported resolution on amazon store