Is 4k worth it? Does the resolution more than balance out the potential requirement to turn down settings?

bazzabear

bazzabear

bazzabear

Soldato
Joined
2 Nov 2013
Posts
4,411
Having upgraded my system earlier in the year, I have vague intentions to move from 1440p to 4k in the future to take advantage of the extra GPU ability. But I do often wonder whether, even with a pretty quick system, there will be drawbacks.

I happened to get an email from Borderlands today listing out the advised settings for my card (5080) for different resolutions:

At 1440p - my current monitor:
Expected FPS: 60+ FPS
Display Mode: Full-screen
VSync: Off
Anti-Aliasing: Disabled
Upscaling Method: NVIDIA DLSS
Upscaling Quality: Balanced
DLSS Frame Generation: On
DLSS Multi-Frame Generation: 4x
NVIDIA Reflex: On
HLOD Loading Range: Far
Geometry Quality: High
Texture Quality: Very High
Textures Streaming Speed: Very High
Anisotropic Filtering Quality: x16
Foliage Density: Very High
Volumetric Fog: Very High
Volumetric Cloud: Very High
Shadow Quality: Very High
Directional Shadow Quality: Very High
Volumetric Cloud Shadows: Enabled
Lighting Quality: High
Reflections Quality: Very High
Shading Quality: High
Post-Processing Quality: Very High

At 4k:
Expected FPS: 60+ FPS
Display Mode: Full-screen
VSync: Off
Anti-Aliasing: Disabled
Upscaling Method: NVIDIA DLSS
Upscaling Quality: Performance
DLSS Frame Generation: On
DLSS Multi-Frame Generation: 4x
NVIDIA Reflex: On
HLOD Loading Range: Far
Geometry Quality: High
Texture Quality: Very High
Textures Streaming Speed: Very High
Anisotropic Filtering Quality: x16
Foliage Density: High
Volumetric Fog: High
Volumetric Cloud: High
Shadow Quality: Medium
Directional Shadow Quality: High
Volumetric Cloud Shadows: Enabled
Lighting Quality: Medium
Reflections Quality: Low
Shading Quality: Medium
Post-Processing Quality: High

All those items in bold are advised to be turned down because of the extra grunt needed to run 4k. Is the trade off worth it? And, presumably, this is only going to get worse as newer games come out and push the capabilities of cards further.

What are people's thoughts?
 
Last edited:
bazzabear said:
Having upgraded my system earlier in the year, I have vague intentions to move from 1440p to 4k in the future to take advantage of the extra GPU ability. But I do often wonder whether, even with a pretty quick system, there will be drawbacks.

I happened to get an email from Borderlands today listing out the advised settings for my card (5080) for different resolutions:

At 1440p - my current monitor:
Expected FPS: 60+ FPS
Display Mode: Full-screen
VSync: Off
Anti-Aliasing: Disabled
Upscaling Method: NVIDIA DLSS
Upscaling Quality: Balanced
DLSS Frame Generation: On
DLSS Multi-Frame Generation: 4x
NVIDIA Reflex: On
HLOD Loading Range: Far
Geometry Quality: High
Texture Quality: Very High
Textures Streaming Speed: Very High
Anisotropic Filtering Quality: x16
Foliage Density: Very High
Volumetric Fog: Very High
Volumetric Cloud: Very High
Shadow Quality: Very High
Directional Shadow Quality: Very High
Volumetric Cloud Shadows: Enabled
Lighting Quality: High
Reflections Quality: Very High
Shading Quality: High
Post-Processing Quality: Very High

At 4k:
Expected FPS: 60+ FPS
Display Mode: Full-screen
VSync: Off
Anti-Aliasing: Disabled
Upscaling Method: NVIDIA DLSS
Upscaling Quality: Performance
DLSS Frame Generation: On
DLSS Multi-Frame Generation: 4x
NVIDIA Reflex: On
HLOD Loading Range: Far
Geometry Quality: High
Texture Quality: Very High
Textures Streaming Speed: Very High
Anisotropic Filtering Quality: x16
Foliage Density: High
Volumetric Fog: High
Volumetric Cloud: High
Shadow Quality: Medium
Directional Shadow Quality: High
Volumetric Cloud Shadows: Enabled
Lighting Quality: Medium
Reflections Quality: Low
Shading Quality: Medium
Post-Processing Quality: High

All those items in bold are advised to be turned down because of the extra grunt needed to run 4k. Is the trade off worth it? And, presumably, this is only going to get worse as newer games come out and push the capabilities of cards further.

What are people's thoughts?
Click to expand...

Stick with 1440p.
 
Depends on the screen size and what games you play.

Your example is of a game that is a few weeks old.

You can play the thousands of older games that run fine on 4K, you have one of the best GPU`s in the world.
 
Last edited:
A 5080 will run pretty much everything at 4k fine. Worst case scenario you might need to turn ray tracing down a bit sometimes but I doubt you will need to tbh.

I'd take those recommendations with a grain of salt as seem really low for a 5080 unless its really badly optimised. Needing DLSS balanced at 1440 seems crazy.

I'm running a 5080 @ dual 4k and get around 90fps in most games.
 
also running a 5080 at 4K and it’s plenty, although I am using DLSS balanced if I want more than 100fps with everything maxed.
IMO running 4K with DLSS balanced still looks better than 1440p native, even on a 1440p screen. If you’re anti-DLSS or “fake frames” then stick to 1440p
 
Depennds on the game.. I have a 4k OLED LG tv, some games i'll run native 4k, others I'm just as happy to run at 1440 with everything dialled up to 11.
 
Those settings will be general settings for Borderlands 6 on your GPU. Borderlands 6 sucks, it's a badly optimised game, so you can generally assume that they have no clue and that their latest game runs like dog poo for many.

As for 4k, well it depends on screen size and the game.
With a 42" display 4k makes a difference, at 27" a little less so.
 
3440 x 1440 is pin sharp for me with max settings.

Which is why my next monitor (OLED or better) will be the same rez.
 
bazzabear said:
But I do often wonder whether, even with a pretty quick system, there will be drawbacks.
Click to expand...

It depends upon the games you play and the quality settings you desire. Any game can crush any resolution if it so wishes. My B580 can bench Horizon Zero Dawn at 4k at near 60 FPS if you change the settings down to medium. Black Smith Wukong will only achieve 60 fps at 1080p on my RTX 4090 if I crank the settings. But I play Sniper Elite 4 at 4k at 120 fps on that same RTX 4090.

I have had a 3440x1440 monitor and a 4k monitor and different monitors are better for different games. If you play racing sims or space sims then the UW monitor gives a better gaming experience. For sniping games you want resolution.
 
I mainly play SP games, so for me personally, I want it to look the best that it can, so that has to be 4K with max graphical settings, if that requires frame generation/reflex, then so be it; I couldn't care less about what's native/faked/real, as long as it doesn't have some weird input latency, which thanks to Reflex, I've never felt in a SP game :)

I prefer a locked 60 with maximum eye candy, versus sacrifising visuals for above 60 FPS in SP games, as it's a PC after all, so it should look better than a console? Otherwise what am I paying for?
I can honestly say, that other than Doom Eternal, I've never played any SP game above 60FPS and felt blown away; Doom Eternal however requires very quick inputs for dodging and combat, but still even at 60FPS the modern Doom engines have felt buttery smooth and fast paced even at 60.

I play COD MW3 MP daily, but as we all know, that's using competitive settings, so it'll never look pretty - for that I will run an uncapped FPS, and can warrant the benefit of above 60FPS, because it gives me an advantage/levels the playing field.

I could never go back to 1440P however, it looks worlds apart. I feel like I'd be robbing myself of something that I've paid more to achieve if I went back to 1440P for SP, just for high FPS.

So TLDR, I'd say if you're only interested in intense fast paced MP, or lightning fast reaction SP stuff like Doom Eternal and whatever else might require those kind of rapid inputs/FPS, then stick with 1440P, but if you're more into SP games, and visuals and clarity matter to you, go 4K.
 
Last edited:
It's a good point.

Personally as long as I can get native min FPS around 60, and average around 100-120 average, that's perfect for me, and then it's a question of experimenting with each games settings.

So for example I'll run cyberpunk at 1440 native with pretty high settings, but Hitman WOA, I can comfortably run at 4k pretty much maxed out. etc.
 
Last edited:
mattyfez said:
So for example I'll run cyberpunk at 1440 native with pretty high settings, but Hitman WOA, I can comfortably run at 4k pretty much maxed out. etc.
Click to expand...

So you're running it at 1440p, but on a 4k display? Does that cause any aspect ratio issues or anything? I've only ever used native resolution with any monitor (well, since we moved from CRTs to flat panels anyway!).
 
That seems like an interesting finding. Suggests that if I/you do find that settings have to be turned down more than you'd like, you can just play in 1440p instead anyway.
Which I guess is exactly what you were describing. :D

I do think I will likely bite the bullet and get a 4k display at some point. And knowing that you can do that makes the decision easier.

I still remember when I first bought an OLED 4k TV (which was an LG one, coincidentally). I got it from Costco just before the first lockdown. I was there buying a TV, and the rest of the world was there stocking up on apocalypse supplies.
When I got it home and played a 4k nature documentary on it, I was absolutely gobsmacked. It's hard not to want that for my gaming too!
 
bazzabear said:
That seems like an interesting finding. Suggests that if I/you do find that settings have to be turned down more than you'd like, you can just play in 1440p instead anyway.
Which I guess is exactly what you were describing. :D

I do think I will likely bite the bullet and get a 4k display at some point. And knowing that you can do that makes the decision easier.

I still remember when I first bought an OLED 4k TV (which was an LG one, coincidentally). I got it from Costco just before the first lockdown. I was there buying a TV, and the rest of the world was there stocking up on apocalypse supplies.
When I got it home and played a 4k nature documentary on it, I was absolutely gobsmacked. It's hard not to want that for my gaming too!
Click to expand...

It's a great alternative to a 4k monitor if you can cope with the size of the bloody thing lol... I think the new ones do 144hz with VRR as well.. Mine does but only 120hz but I'm not really bothered about that, 120 is OK for me
 
No way I'm going above 32" for the monitor. It's in the corner of the lounge, and the main TV is 55" - it'd look ridiculous!

I've never actually done so, but nothing stopping me playing something that uses controller on the TV though, see how it runs. I do have a nice long HDMI cable that would allow it.
 
bazzabear said:
No way I'm going above 32" for the monitor. It's in the corner of the lounge, and the main TV is 55" - it'd look ridiculous!

I've never actually done so, but nothing stopping me playing something that uses controller on the TV though, see how it runs. I do have a nice long HDMI cable that would allow it.
Click to expand...

yeah a TV for a monitor would be too big, max is 32".

I've tried my PC with the 65" LG C9 looks great but it loses the "play at a desk" appeal with the TV
 
This is true.. My pc is hooked up to a 1440p monitor/desk with the TV as a second monitor for couch gaming

My bedroom pc just has another LG TV for gaming in bed with an Xbox pad lol
 
Last edited:
bazzabear said:
Having upgraded my system earlier in the year, I have vague intentions to move from 1440p to 4k in the future to take advantage of the extra GPU ability. But I do often wonder whether, even with a pretty quick system, there will be drawbacks.

I happened to get an email from Borderlands today listing out the advised settings for my card (5080) for different resolutions:

At 1440p - my current monitor:
Expected FPS: 60+ FPS
Display Mode: Full-screen
VSync: Off
Anti-Aliasing: Disabled
Upscaling Method: NVIDIA DLSS
Upscaling Quality: Balanced
DLSS Frame Generation: On
DLSS Multi-Frame Generation: 4x
NVIDIA Reflex: On
HLOD Loading Range: Far
Geometry Quality: High
Texture Quality: Very High
Textures Streaming Speed: Very High
Anisotropic Filtering Quality: x16
Foliage Density: Very High
Volumetric Fog: Very High
Volumetric Cloud: Very High
Shadow Quality: Very High
Directional Shadow Quality: Very High
Volumetric Cloud Shadows: Enabled
Lighting Quality: High
Reflections Quality: Very High
Shading Quality: High
Post-Processing Quality: Very High

At 4k:
Expected FPS: 60+ FPS
Display Mode: Full-screen
VSync: Off
Anti-Aliasing: Disabled
Upscaling Method: NVIDIA DLSS
Upscaling Quality: Performance
DLSS Frame Generation: On
DLSS Multi-Frame Generation: 4x
NVIDIA Reflex: On
HLOD Loading Range: Far
Geometry Quality: High
Texture Quality: Very High
Textures Streaming Speed: Very High
Anisotropic Filtering Quality: x16
Foliage Density: High
Volumetric Fog: High
Volumetric Cloud: High
Shadow Quality: Medium
Directional Shadow Quality: High
Volumetric Cloud Shadows: Enabled
Lighting Quality: Medium
Reflections Quality: Low
Shading Quality: Medium
Post-Processing Quality: High

All those items in bold are advised to be turned down because of the extra grunt needed to run 4k. Is the trade off worth it? And, presumably, this is only going to get worse as newer games come out and push the capabilities of cards further.

What are people's thoughts?
Click to expand...

The simplest way to do it is to try 1440p on your current system without DLSS. That gives a very good indication of what it will be like on a 4K monitor with DLSS Quality.

If you have a problem with that (fps is too low) then in my experience the best thing to do is to switch Framegen on. It doesn't improve gameplay, but it does look a lot smoother.

These days there are so many upscaling options, I am pretty sure you will always be able to find something that's acceptable. Especially if you are OK with framegen.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom