4K - It's time

Seanspeed · 3 Sep 2015 at 15:42

Schnippzle said:
Isn't that a different card?

Yes, but the discrepancy between that and a 980Ti wont be that huge. Especially not at 4k.

VincentHanna · 3 Sep 2015 at 16:09

Yeah, 1080p with 4x SSAA is effectively rendering internally at 4k.

So at 4k you don't need 4xSSAA as you would then been internally rending at 8k.

I was just copying the image of the ultra settings from the benchmark thread

davewhite04 · 3 Sep 2015 at 16:23

VincentHanna said:
Yeah, 1080p with 4x SSAA is effectively rendering internally at 4k.

So at 4k you don't need 4xSSAA as you would then been internally rending at 8k.

I was just copying the image of the ultra settings from the benchmark thread

Funnily you should say that, because I double checked my AA and it was just FXAA. Increasing that did drop the FPS.

davewhite04 · 3 Sep 2015 at 16:33

VincentHanna said:
Yeah, 1080p with 4x SSAA is effectively rendering internally at 4k.

So at 4k you don't need 4xSSAA as you would then been internally rending at 8k.

I was just copying the image of the ultra settings from the benchmark thread

I've noticed the shadows were normal too, instead of high and that give me an average of 48 FPS average and 60 FPS high using the Tomb Raider benchmark.

Basically I played the game on Ultimate, I didn't know there would be any higher settings you could set.

davewhite04 · 3 Sep 2015 at 16:37

Still an amazing experience, I couldn't of wished for a better first 4K game to play. Going to look at Metro 2033 Redux now, which I think might be more system heavy. 52-54C under load is amazing for the card though, no idea why shadows would reduce system performance that much.