What resolution do you game at?

What resolution do you game at?

  • 1080P 16:9/21:9

    Votes: 45 23.8%

  • 1440p 16:9

    Votes: 65 34.4%

  • 1440p 21:9

    Votes: 34 18.0%

  • 1600p 21:9

    Votes: 4 2.1%

  • 2160P

    Votes: 50 26.5%

  • Will drop resolution to actively use RT

    Votes: 9 4.8%

  • Will not drop resolution to actively use RT

    Votes: 36 19.0%
  • Total voters
    189
linuxdude9 said:
1440P 165hz. Waiting for 4k 144hz screens to improve before I make the jump.
Click to expand...

Same here, except my display is 144 Hz. Not that I really care as IMO anything above 120 Hz is just a bonus rather than something truly better.

I just sold my 980 Ti and since there are almost no games coming this year on PC that I truly want to play, I'll probably wait until next year to see what the situation is like. I'd like to buy a 32" 4K 144 Hz G-Sync display when they become available. Might look for any deals or used 2080 Ti cards at that point too just so I can have something I hopefully don't have to upgrade for a few years.

The 7nm cards rumored for 2019 are what worries me. If they turn out to be a lot faster than 2080 series then an expensive card like the 2080 Ti might become less than stellar rather quickly.
 
alxlwson said:
See, thats the thing- I was ignorant of the video you mentioned.

There is a correct way and then a douche way of attempting to educate someone. You chose the douche way, and assumed I was ignoring information, rather than simply being ignorant.

So yeah, get off your high horse.
Click to expand...
Your ignorance is your problem...until your start spreading it.
But being mad at me for pointing out your ignorance is hillarious...
 
1080/240hz and since I won't buy an Nvidia card I guess it'll stay that way until the 7th of Never when AMD releases a new GPU.
 
I voted 4k since that is what I would like to be gaming at and I have a 4k monitor, just I'm also running a 970. My plan was to update to a new card to get 60fps at 4k with the new generation of cards but I'm still waiting on benchmarks.
 
It doesn't surprise me that so many voted 1440p here.

I'm on 1440p on a Korean panel overclocked to 90hz and have really been loving it. It's the perfect compromise resolution. With a good card you can run any game at max settings and unless you stick your nose 6 inches from the screen it's hard to see individual pixels. Before I had switched to the 1440p monitor I was really conscious of the drop in detail and individual pixels especially in any game where you have to look at small objects in the distance. The detail breaks down to individual pixels. At 1440p it's ALMOST unnoticeable.

Sure, 4k will be the final jump that will pretty much get us to where no one will be able to make out individual pixels... optimum density. But 1440p gets us acceptably close with a FAR lower workload on the GPU.

Unfortunately, the absolute ideal for VR will probably require 4k per eye because of ultimately needing to fill peripheral vision.

But at that point, I think screen resolution technology will be able to stop. It'll be all about quality improvements from there.
 
On my UHD screen I usually lowered resolution to as much as 3840x1770 because 980Ti is not all that great at 4K

For RT I will probably drop resolution... or hopefully DLSS will allow for higher resolution once they refine the tech and implement it for RT games

I am also considering using HP LP240zx for Ray-Traced games for full eye-candy experience at expense of input-lag and g-sync. At least to see how it looks on reference display.
 
I do 5760x1080. I was so stoked when simultaneous multi projection (SMP) came out with Pascal. I was so happy to when they promised everything would line up properly for a change without stretching on the side monitors and perform better. Not ONE game I play ended up supporting it (I don't do racing games).

I'm hoping for better luck with Ray Tracing on Turing...
 
XoR_ said:
On my UHD screen I usually lowered resolution to as much as 3840x1770 because 980Ti is not all that great at 4K
Click to expand...
If your screen is large enough (40"+), you can set res @ 3840x1620, which is 21:9. That is 25% less pixels than full 4k, so a bit easier to run.
 
GreenOrbs said:
I do 5760x1080. I was so stoked when simultaneous multi projection (SMP) came out with Pascal. I was so happy to when they promised everything would line up properly for a change without stretching on the side monitors and perform better. Not ONE game I play ended up supporting it (I don't do racing games).
Click to expand...
The only non-VR game I know of that ended up supporting SMP is iRacing, and I heard that using SMP caused image distortion on the side monitors - which is exactly what I thought SMP was supposed to resolve.

It sure sounded good in the press release, though.
 
alxlwson said:
Lol. Do some math, pick your closest :)
Click to expand...

Its about 3/4 of 4K so I guess 2160p... Way cheaper though than almost any other option. I picked up 3 of the IPS Dell 27" Freesync monitors for $80 a pop last Black Friday (staples almost always has a Dell for about $75 to 80). Had Staples 24" Dell monitors before that.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top