Which graphics card do you have in your PC? Mine is like middle range, I think I wont even try 4k in modern games, tbh, not a big fan of seeing the fans spinning for no reason and no clear benefit by putting it to the limit. Only with classic games and 'cos of VSR I will --those games had good models and polygon count, they will look great. Yesterday I tried with the only game I have installed for now, Heroes of Might and Magic V, which is a classic. It was running at 4k and 60 fps but it is a very undemanding genre and game --there was tearing at times though.
The game costs almost 30€ and it's a modern game.
Mate thats just supersampling thats been around for more than a decade
Had seen the png screengrab you shared. It doesn't look blurry but small when I switch to a 4k resolution. 125% or especially 150% scaling is palatable, in fact I am writing this text at 4k with 150% scaling, so it doesn't look so small. 100% is for masochists, you can't see much. How did you take the screengrabs below for a quick comparison? Because it doesn't matter how much I scale the text, but at 1080p native the image to the right doesn't look as blurry by any stretch of the imagination. Those could be downscaling artifacts of a 4k screen. These are the resolution options I get.Mate thats just supersampling thats been around for more than a decade
Instead of talking pictures of games where it may be difficult to see, look at this, text on your monitor
http://zedzeek.com/junk/4k.png
your text will be more blurry (blurrier?) than how I see it on a 4k monitor, thats just how it is.
enabling VSR on a 1080p monitor will not make the image magically look as good as it does with 4k
edit- eg on 4k monitor the text looks like the left side. On 1080p, it looks like the right, the middle is how it will appear on your monitor to your eyes with VSR
yep
sooooooo fast) Got the game's patch here with an updated exe for modern OSes. (thaniks Davros!)
Well I assume I've seen it
the VSR article kinda says it all, but I never claimed it looks as good as 4k when it's 4 times the pixels. One can clearly see there is an improvement in the article, but if you have a native set, it's better --I can tell 'cos one can see on a 1080p set that it's not the same as native. In regards to 3D my panel works if you use passive 3D glasses, it doesn't work with active 3D glasses but I couldn't see the image in 3D cos I need the USB cable that came with the glasses.Well I assume I've seen it
seriously mate
take a step back, take a few breaths
here is avatar in 3d
do you see the 3d effect, just like the cinema with 3d glasses?
............. no ........, well think about that ... ( you finally understand)
its not so pronounced as WRT to you looking at a 4k image on a 1080p screen vs 3d, but its similar, Cyan you will not say looking at a 3d image on a 2d screen looks like it did in the cinema,
yet you are saying the same looking at a 4k image on a 1080p (2k) screen and saying its just as good ... dude its not, until you see 4k on a 4k screen you cant appreciate how it looks. downscaling 4k->2k aint the same, just like watching 3d glasses cinema on 2d (non glasses) screen, yes its not that extreme but its on the pathway to it
when you say older, if you mean running an old game at 4K, don't you fear that the GPU wont perform?
Does it look better than supersampling ?
Blazcowicz described it better. Everything looks cleaner than at 1080p. "Free" antialiasing apart, there is something going on, like the image is more crisp, as if there is more granularity. But I rather prefer native for most modern games, because 1080p is actually very good and framerate is king. 1440p is a possibility but only if the GPU can handle 60 fps on all modern games, which I don't think is the case.
, that is so authentic!
