4K Monitor Vs. 1440p Vs. 1080p

[pluke the 2 10]

Hey Guys,

Question for those who play multiplayer wasteland. Are there any advantages on the following screens?

4K Monitor Vs. 1440p Vs. 1080p.

Right now I got the rig to drive them all. I was looking to have an advantage while playing Wasteland. My question is, is there any advantage to seeing players better by having a larger resolution? Such as 4K Monitor Vs. 1440p Vs. 1080p?

My rig is a 5820k, titan x, 16gb ddr4.

Right now i'm using a basic 1080p monitor that has 144hz 1ms response time and gysnc. In Wasteland, I don't see more than 100fps. I get down to 40fps when the fighting begins.

Hardest thing though is spotting people. My old eyes are old. And I'm just wondering if you guys think there is any advantages to running the higher resolutions.

I am looking for a 27-32" screen as well. Any recommendations?

TY in advance.

---------- Post added at 04:18 PM ---------- Previous post was at 04:16 PM ----------

I am Currently running this:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=9SIA0AJ2N63982&cm_re=acer_1080p_144hz-_-24-009-657-_-Product

But I would like to know if 1440p/4k will give me a clearer picture so I can spot enemies easier/before they see me.

[chrisb 196]

Hey Guys,

Question for those who play multiplayer wasteland. Are there any advantages on the following screens?

4K Monitor Vs. 1440p Vs. 1080p.

Right now I got the rig to drive them all. I was looking to have an advantage while playing Wasteland. My question is, is there any advantage to seeing players better by having a larger resolution? Such as 4K Monitor Vs. 1440p Vs. 1080p?

My rig is a 5820k, titan x, 16gb ddr4.

Right now i'm using a basic 1080p monitor that has 144hz 1ms response time and gysnc. In Wasteland, I don't see more than 100fps. I get down to 40fps when the fighting begins.

Hardest thing though is spotting people. My old eyes are old. And I'm just wondering if you guys think there is any advantages to running the higher resolutions.

I am looking for a 27-32" screen as well. Any recommendations?

TY in advance.

---------- Post added at 04:18 PM ---------- Previous post was at 04:16 PM ----------

I am Currently running this:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=9SIA0AJ2N63982&cm_re=acer_1080p_144hz-_-24-009-657-_-Product

But I would like to know if 1440p/4k will give me a clearer picture so I can spot enemies easier/before they see me.

Maybe sit closer to the monitor.. :p

No really!..

I have a 42" 1920x1080 monitor. I sit around 3ft :butbut: Yes !! 3ft away from it.. and see most all the action. ;) Well as soon as I have found the switch to turn the blasted thing on with.

Other than that, a better res may help. I do use the VSR on my R9-290, does some funny things with the res. Not sure what of course, still looks the same to me and my eyes. Although they're getting on in years now. The eyes, not the 290..:D

[gambla 10]

Hey,

if you're sure that your gpu can power the resolution you're fine. I doubt you'll see players any better as the picture gets larger and more detailed. I've read of cheaters who did the opposite, they turned down graphic quality to see players better. (facepalm)

[old_painless 182]

I would suggest that you keep high refresh rate, regardless of resolution. By all means, go for 4K if you can pull the pixel count and remain fluid (the Titan probably can) but do not go down to 60hz in the refresh rate. Good refresh rate will help in detecting movement, since that is one of the main give-aways in Arma.

I am looking at this for the moment: BenQ XL2730Z (QHD, 144 Hz). It's not 4K, "only" QHD/1440p, but has IPS panel and 144hz refresh. Some good IPS screens coming out soon, I read

[St. Jimmy 272]

You likely have already done this but whatever:

You can also try to add some sharpen filter in the graphics settings. That can help some if you haven't added. It feels like you'd put on your eye glasses and see the world again more sharp. Some can argue it makes some detail to lose or similar but I like how clear the picture comes.

[ratszo 17]

Hey Guys, ....

Right now i'm using a basic 1080p monitor that has 144hz 1ms response time and gysnc. In Wasteland, I don't see more than 100fps. I get down to 40fps when the fighting begins.

Hardest thing though is spotting people. My old eyes are old. And I'm just wondering if you guys think there is any advantages to running the higher resolutions. ...

Short answer is no. As stated above, low-res will yield bigger pixels.

I remember reading 'bout competitive gaming where the pros used lo-res & small screens in shooters.

"144hz 1ms response" --sounds like a very good screen, high refresh is easier on the eyes.

Seeing the enemy before they see you is the art of this game.

My advice is to slow the pace, head on a swivel, freelook most of the time.

Use cover. Guys in 3rd person pov tend to ignore cover. Try 1st person as default if you haven't.

Shooting is a game of angles. Reduce the angles, create fire-lanes, control the killzone.

When moving, if you can see the countryside --the countryside can see you. Don't skyline.

For effects, try colour saturation. Nvidea calls it 'vibrance'.

Good Luck!

[vegeta897 13]

Not sure what people are on about with regards to it being harder to see people with a higher resolution. If the FOV is the same, and the physical monitor sizes are the same, an object will appear the same physical size on screen. The difference is how many pixels make up that object. More pixels means more clarity. In a typical shooter with maximum engagement range of a few hundred meters, that doesn't matter. But in Arma, units can be only a few pixels tall in the distance, and they'll be that much more legible if there are more pixels to draw them. While it doesn't necessarily make them easier to spot, it makes it easier to identify them and see what they're doing.

[ratszo 17]

...

Well, the OP's question is will hi-res give a distinct advantage over players with lower resolutions.

Maybe someone has screenshots using hi/lo res?

I can say in older games i've played, bigger pixels at lo-res was easier to see than smaller pixels at hi-res.

Mostly thinking of flight sims where a pilot scans the sky for that single pixel --bigger is better.

Doubt it matters much in arma.

[vegeta897 13]

Well, yes, there are some cases where if an object is just the right size that it is represented by a single pixel in either resolution, then the smaller resolution makes it appear larger. But If an object is say 5 pixels tall in 1080p, then it would be about 6 or 7 pixels tall in 1440p, which gives it a little bit more detail, possibly making it easier to tell what faction, or type of unit, or direction it's facing, etc.

[ratszo 17]

For sure. High res just looks better, less need for AA solutions, truer to life.

[Alpha-Kilo 36]

What do think about a 40-inch 4k screen such as this one: Philips BDM4065UC? There are also a few curved Samsung 4k TV sets which may be used for gaming at 60 Hz but the graphics card has to support the latest HDMI standard which may be a problem.

[cosmic10r 2331]

I'm using my 55in samsung tv and nvidia dsr to play games in 1440p.

[tortuosit 486]

End is not reached, 1920xX is not optimal at normal Desktop screen sizes and distance to player. I guess the end (i.e. you won't see a difference at higher res.) is somewhere at 4000xX pixels, but GPU have to match up. Then people may start talking about placebo effects as we know it from the audio folks. "I can clearly see a sharper image on my 16000x10000px screen than on my 8000x5000"

Except if one day computers do works different and pixels do not exist.

[rundll.exe 12]

I have a H-IPS 30" screen (Dell Ultrasharp U3011) running at 2560 x 1600 , and that was a huge step forward in clarity and (more important) immersion compared to my old 22" screen. So yes, it's worth it. A bonus with such a high pixel density is that you don't need that much AA, which might relieve your videocard a bit. (My GTX 770 can just handle this resolution @ 2X AA)

TV screens usually don't work for everyday PC tasks because of the low pixel density and bad color reproduction, but those mentioned above might be good enough for gaming indeed.

[brightcandle 114]

At a normal desktop viewing distance of a few feet the current estimate is that we will exceed the eyes ability to distinguish the screen from reality (in resolution terms anyway) around 12,000 vertical pixels (where current 4k is 2160p). It may be somewhere up to about double that or it might end up a little less but that is how good the human eye is. We can currently tell we are looking at a screen basically and will be able to for some time. More pressing is probably the very limited colours screens can produce from the visible spectrum as well as how accurately they are represented, but all these aspects need improvement.

4K and 1440p are hard to drive in Arma 3 and one of the reasons for it is not really GPU horse power, its that the CPU is involved and is impacted by the resolution. Most games don't produce much in the very of graphics using the CPU but Arma 3 appears to do so. Its likely responsible for much of the problem people currently have with the game and its definitely an issue scaling the game up in terms of pixel density. I have played at 1440p and done so with 2x 970's and basically I will always have a lower frame rate than someone who is running at 1080p regardless of settings because of the way the game is written.

[doveman 7]

I believe the focus on pixels is somewhat misguided. After all, you can watch real-life footage on a 1080p (or even 720p) monitor and it looks real (because it is) so we should be looking at what's missing in games that makes them not look as good. Otherwise it won't matter how many pixels you throw at the problem.

[cosmic10r 2331]

I prefer size to overall ms time and refresh rate but that has become a personal preference. Strange thing is I see no change in fps if I run in 1080p with 4x aa and 1440p with no antialiasing using dsr. I find the 1440p picture slightly better so I have stayed with it. Same with witcher.. amazing in 1440p with no aa and looks better than 1080 with full aa.