What looks better. 1080p Ultra or 1440p High?
- Thread starter beany_bot
- Start date
Two very different things. High vs ultra is very subjective and depends entirely on the game. Also, resolution can't precisely give a gauge of quality, unless the screens are the same size. I currently play 1080p on 32" and I'm starting to hate it. It was great when I first got it a few years ago, but it's starting to age now. My next screen will probably be 21:9 2560x1080, so same vertical resolution but on a much high pixel density as a 30" ultrawide is no where near as tall but with the same amount of pixels vertically. This will result in a sharper image, and smaller necessity for antialiasing.
So higher resolution on the same sized screen = a higher pixel density = a sharper, better image. It won't make the 'graphics' better; that's where ultra settings would play in, but both will demand more from the GPU. I've found that the difference between high and ultra in most games is things like shadow resolution/distance and lighting effects. High would suffice for most. Personally, I HATE jagged edges, so currently anti aliasing or a higher resolution (downsampled to 1080p) is a must.
Why don't you try DSR if you have nVidia? Run the game at 1440p downsized to the screens native resolution?
Last edited:
so 1440p would "look" better?
If all being even, absolutely.
well..... bear in mind everything isn't even.
I would need to knock down my graphics settings to achieve the same FPS at 1440p.
So I refer back to my original question
Which looks nicer. 1080p @ ultra (60fps) or 1440p @ high (60fps)
I mean, same game, same settings, same fps.. i.e. all being even.
If you respond with everything isnt even, then its impossible to answer your original question.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 21 Jun 2006
- Posts
- 38,367
I'd go 1080p ultra the jump to 1440p isn't HUGE but the jump from high to ultra should be much more noticeable.
However if your screens native res is 1440p, i'd be inclined to run native res at all times and sacrifice settings to get the best out the monitor.
However if your screens native res is 1440p, i'd be inclined to run native res at all times and sacrifice settings to get the best out the monitor.
Depends on the game, what the High and Ultra presets entail and also how much value you put in certain visual aspects, but I'd say 95% of the time 1440p on High will look better. The difference between High and Ultra *usually* isn't that big at all, whereas the difference between 1080p and 1440p is fairly undeniable and shouldn't need a side-by-side to make the point.
EDIT: This is assuming you're talking native resolution(1440p monitor vs 1080p monitor) and not downsampling 1440p to 1080p. If you're talking about a 1080p display and what resolution to set, it becomes a far more debatable question. Image benefits of downsampling from 1440p to 1080p aren't massive, but *might* trump other effects somewhat. As an example, I'm currently running Rise of the Tomb Raider at 1440p with certain settings turned down to keep performance acceptable. I feel that the game's aliasing is quite bad at 1080p so the benefits of the extra AA that come from downsampling from 1440p benefit me more than cranking up shadows slightly or some near meaningless reflection and hair settings and whatnot. But I might not feel that way in another game, like with The Witcher 3, where the foliage draw distances and whatnot are more worth turning up(though I still never used Hairworks...).
EDIT: This is assuming you're talking native resolution(1440p monitor vs 1080p monitor) and not downsampling 1440p to 1080p. If you're talking about a 1080p display and what resolution to set, it becomes a far more debatable question. Image benefits of downsampling from 1440p to 1080p aren't massive, but *might* trump other effects somewhat. As an example, I'm currently running Rise of the Tomb Raider at 1440p with certain settings turned down to keep performance acceptable. I feel that the game's aliasing is quite bad at 1080p so the benefits of the extra AA that come from downsampling from 1440p benefit me more than cranking up shadows slightly or some near meaningless reflection and hair settings and whatnot. But I might not feel that way in another game, like with The Witcher 3, where the foliage draw distances and whatnot are more worth turning up(though I still never used Hairworks...).
Last edited:
I think I'm going to wait for Vega so probs won't have to lower from Ultra anyway.
Lets guess that vega can run some games on 4K and others 1440p
If I bought a 4K monitor. How would games look on it downscaled to 1440p? or again would you run at 4k with some settings turned down?
ive never had 4k but i guess it can be run without aa and still look pretty good, im using a 38" 3840x1600 with a single fury whilst im waiting on vega and its not too bad, i just lower enough aa for the games to run well and still look good, ive not botherd looking at frames per second as i wont worry about what i dont know
