1080P with Anti Aliasing vs 4k Without

[cyrryanc]

I had an argument with my roommate about 1080P with anti aliasing vs 4k with no anti aliasing. He thinks 1080P with anti aliasing  will look better then 4k without. Lets put frame rate aside and just talk about visual quality. Do you guys think 4k without AA will look better then 1080P with AA given that they are both on an identical 27" monitor?  

[VerticalDiscussions]

Ive never even looked at a 4K display for computer, but honestly i dont think it will look better, no matter what. The Pixel density is a physical issue that can be overcomed by software settings  and boy do i see an ocean of pixels on my 23 inch 1080p display!

[Techicolors]

depends on the type of AA used 

[MegaDave91]

At 27" 4K no AA > 1080P AA 

[cyrryanc]

Just now, wrathoftheturkey said:

Dude.... AAing is to reduce jaggies that come from using pixels to make the pixels less noticeable by blurring them, right? But with a 4k display, you can barely see the pixels t begin with. So there are no jaggies to get rid of (or at least they're much less noticeable at a normal distance)

That is what I was trying to tell him lmao. 

[SCHISCHKA]

are you saying no AA whatsoever? it will look horrible no matter how many pixels you have. 1080p scaled up on a 4k display looks pretty good. I have UHD and I prefer to run games at 1080p with the highest graphics settings over running the game at UHD with low settings

[cyrryanc]

1 minute ago, SCHISCHKA said:

are you saying no AA whatsoever? it will look horrible no matter how many pixels you have. 1080p scaled up on a 4k display looks pretty good. I have UHD and I prefer to run games at 1080p with the highest graphics settings over running the game at UHD with low settings

I meant as in all settings are the same (all ultra) just AA is turned off for the 4k. This is hypothetical. 

[cyrryanc]

1 minute ago, wrathoftheturkey said:

Graphics settings are about more than 4k mate

Yes I know, this is all hypothetical. I just wanna know what would look better, 4k without AA or 1080P with AA, all other texture settings are on ultra.  

[SCHISCHKA]

2 minutes ago, cyrryanc said:

I meant as in all settings are the same (all ultra) just AA is turned off for the 4k. This is hypothetical. 

AA isn't just jagged edges it also makes textures look better. With it turned off completely textures will not look nice and more pixels on the screen will not change that

[SCHISCHKA]

4 minutes ago, wrathoftheturkey said:

Graphics settings are about more than 4k mate

no shit

[cyrryanc]

2 minutes ago, SCHISCHKA said:

AA isn't just jagged edges it also makes textures look better. With it turned off completely textures will not look nice and more pixels on the screen will not change that

Yeah I know but since in a 4k monitor the pixels are much smaller so wouldn't the jagged lines be harder to make out ? I understand if you blow it up to 60inches it wouldn't look great but what about a smaller more traditional 27" monitor? 

[cyrryanc]

2 minutes ago, wrathoftheturkey said:

Ya, ik. Why don't you try it with an easy-to-run game? Like TF2?

 

I'd check it out myself, but I don't have a 4k monitor.

 

Just to be clear, Nvidia actually markets this as a kick-ass form of AAing --literally run your game at 4k and then let it downsample. Achieves the desired effect of a better approximation of pixels, but damn does it task your hardware (called supersampling)

Yeah I am familiar with Supersamping and I would like to test this out but we only have a 43" 4k monitor we can try and I would rather try it on a computer monitor like 27" since the pixels will be harder to make out with the human eye. 

[AdamH96]

4K no AA any day, just recently got NFS 2016, had the AA on and decided to turn it off (they use a weird TXAA which induced weird motion blur) and looks insanely crystal clear

[MegaDave91]

2 minutes ago, cyrryanc said:

Yeah I know but since in a 4k monitor the pixels are much smaller so wouldn't the jagged lines be harder to make out ? I understand if you blow it up to 60inches it wouldn't look great but what about a smaller more traditional 27" monitor? 

What is the viewing distance of this monitor?

[done12many2]

3 minutes ago, cyrryanc said:

Yeah I know but since in a 4k monitor the pixels are much smaller so wouldn't the jagged lines be harder to make out ? I understand if you blow it up to 60inches it wouldn't look great but what about a smaller more traditional 27" monitor? 

 

4k with no AA will still look better than 1080p with the best of AA.  

 

Hell 4k with no AA looks better than my 3440 x 1440 ultrawide with AA, so it damn sure looks better than 1080p.  That's with them side by side.

[AdamH96]

1 minute ago, cyrryanc said:

Yeah I am familiar with Supersamping and I would like to test this out but we only have a 43" 4k monitor we can try and I would rather try it on a computer monitor like 27" since the pixels will be harder to make out with the human eye. 

I have a 25" 1080P monitor and a 28" 4K monitor, no mater how much aa you put on that 1080p image it will not look as good as a 4k no aa image.

[cyrryanc]

1 minute ago, MegaDave91 said:

What is the viewing distance of this monitor?

Lets say a normal view distance, about a meter. 

[SCHISCHKA]

3 minutes ago, cyrryanc said:

Yeah I know but since in a 4k monitor the pixels are much smaller so wouldn't the jagged lines be harder to make out ? I understand if you blow it up to 60inches it wouldn't look great but what about a smaller more traditional 27" monitor? 

mines 28". depends on the texture really. If the texture has stripes and straight lines it is very noticeable when you move from a distance towards it. You prob wouldn't notice in a game like CSGO which has a lot of camo and stone type textures. i notice it a lot in total war which has a lot of flags & logos on moving objects.

[cyrryanc]

1 minute ago, SCHISCHKA said:

mines 28". depends on the texture really. If the texture has stripes and straight lines it is very noticeable when you move from a distance towards it. You prob wouldn't notice in a game like CSGO which has a lot of camo and stone type textures. i notice it a lot in total war which has a lot of flags & logos on moving objects.

What about a newer game like BF1 with higher res textures? 

[ARikozuM]

Having used both, I would say, objectively, that 2160 (no AA) is much clearer than 1080 (with max AA) as the number of pixels has increased rather than used an algorithm to smooth out the lower amount of pixels.

 

Honestly, though, triple monitors are better at any resolution. #HiddenAgenda

[SCHISCHKA]

3 minutes ago, cyrryanc said:

What about a newer game like BF1 with higher res textures? 

i dont have BF1. The newest game I have is Dying Light. Indoor scenes are ok but not the outdoor scene, the training area. Theres prob more textures there and theres also more distance between camera and the texture. NPC faces at the start of the game look ok, only small differences. I remember it was the wood textures in the training area that looked rather crappy

[delliks7]

On 12/1/2016 at 7:46 PM, VerticalDiscussions said:

Ive never even looked at a 4K display for computer, but honestly i dont think it will look better, no matter what. The Pixel density is a physical issue that can be overcomed by software settings  and boy do i see an ocean of pixels on my 23 inch 1080p display!

this guy..... is how the world is now, "i have no experience with this subject,  but heres my opinion and im definitely not wrong! lol. 4k doesnt really need much post processing, it definitely craps on a tiny 1080p display.