Gaming at 1440p from 1080p - worth it??

[shankly1985]

I dunno, I preferred a higher fps than a better resolution, which is less noticeable than the lower fps. 1440 is quite a big hit on performance, more than I expected.

Am the opposite, I was surprised how little the performance hit was with my 290.. Game to Game is different but it range from just 20 to 30fps I get most this back by playing mostly High settings with FXAA or SMAA etc Still keep fps above 60

 

[bigjimmyauk]

Using DSR I can't tell much difference between 1080p & 1440p TBH, but going to 1620p..woah, night and day.

Real shame that it didn't become the go to resolution after 1080p IMO, much better than 1440p as that still needs Anti Aliasing to hide the jaggies, but 2880x1620 really is where AA starts to become unnecessary.

1620p was such a weird resolution, but any jump thats higher is going to show a benefit of some sort. the jump from 1080p to 4k tho is pretty insane lol

 

[shankly1985]

Using DSR I can't tell much difference between 1080p & 1440p TBH, but going to 1620p..woah, night and day.

Real shame that it didn't become the go to resolution after 1080p IMO, much better than 1440p as that still needs Anti Aliasing to hide the jaggies, but 2880x1620 really is where AA starts to become unnecessary.

DSR isn't the same has using Native res.. You cant see what another res looks like without having the pixels to back it up lol So on 1080p vs 1440p DSR you wont really notice a think apart from AA will look more sharper. Compare Native to Native and its Night and Day
DSR is just for pushing more higher quality AA if you have the horsepower.

See Nvidia's write up
http://www.geforce.co.uk/hardware/technology/dsr/technology

 

[Rezident]

I could not go back now, very happy with 1440p. Everything looks better, sharper, more space and yet you don't need to keep buying the latest overpriced gpu like 4K.

 

[arc@css]

Am the opposite, I was surprised how little the performance hit was with my 290.. Game to Game is different but it range from just 20 to 30fps I get most this back by playing mostly High settings with FXAA or SMAA etc Still keep fps above 60

In my experience with radeons, quite often a higher resolution enables the card to stretch its legs that bit more & to really come into its own.

 

[Storrm]

As everyone else has already said - 100% worth it. As far as I'm concerned its the next 'sweet spot' where everyone needs to aspire to be as 'middle of the road' graphics card technologies are capable of running them (admittedly sometimes with the eye-candy downed a little), whereas top-draw cards (970+) can run most mainstream games today very well at 1440p. I went from a Dell 1080p to a Dell S2716DG and will never look back. My 780ti is able to push it ok, but I would like a little more oomph for the main titles.

 

[Perfect_Chaos]

I agree with that statement. I do have a huge 4k TV as well and blu rays look absolutely amazing, much better than my previous HD Tv. I just wish there was more 4k content, but let's not go there

Good to know that HD 1080p blu rays still look good when run on a 4k screen, though I'm a bit confused how they can look good on TV but on a PC monitor things can look worse if you lower the resolution below native. Maybe something to do with the way the scaling works

 

[Griffildur]

Good to know that HD 1080p blu rays still look good when run on a 4k screen, though I'm a bit confused how they can look good on TV but on a PC monitor things can look worse if you lower the resolution below native. Maybe something to do with the way the scaling works

I didn't take it that far. All I did was lower the resolution to 1080 and play a few games on that resolution. That was definitely not a good idea on that monitor.
The real estate available is pathetic but of course you'll never care if you are used to 1080 in the first place.
To be fair the monitor can stretch to 3600 x 2100 so while not 4k, quite close. I have actually completely switched to that resolution ( since getting the 1080 ) for movies, gaming and work.

 

[Ticonderoga]

A user on another forum pointed out that 1440p might be a bad resolution for
RTS and Moba games since the objects will be too small to click.
Any thoughts on that`?

 

[chrcoluk]

I know that maybe this should live in another section but I'm sure loads of people ask this before they upgrade their cards etc so here goes.

I'm going to see an IPS 165hz 1440p ROG Swift on Wednesday night - I've been after a 1440p monitor for a while, but will I really notice the difference coming from my 120hz 1080p BENQ?

I've got a 980ti under water at 1500/8000 so should have enough grunt for BF1, battlefront and bf4 which is what'll mostly be playing.

How good is 1440p really..?

All thoughts welcome

Personal opinion is depends on how big the screen is.

I got my 27" monitor for non gaming reasons (more real estate on desktop), gaming at non native resolutions isnt great and so Ideally I game at the native resolution of the monitor.

So e.g. 1080p on this screen looks worse than 1050p on my dell 22" (native resolution on the dell), because ot the scaling adjustments and that the larger screen shows the pixels a bit more.

 

[Nexus18]

The increase in clarity/sharpness that people see with "1440P" isn't necessarily just because "it's 1440P".... It is because the PPI value (pixels per inch) has also increased, this is why 1920x1080, even 1280x720 7-10" tablets are far superior in terms of clarity/sharpness than any large 4k monitor/TV.

Also, sitting/viewing distance comes into play as well.

If going above 25" 16.9 then 2560x1440 is really needed imo, having a monitor with at least 100 PPI at arms length is what you want imo.

 

[FoxEye]

The increase in clarity/sharpness that people see with "1440P" isn't necessarily just because "it's 1440P".... It is because the PPI value (pixels per inch) has also increased, this is why 1920x1080, even 1280x720 7-10" tablets are far superior in terms of clarity/sharpness than any large 4k monitor/TV.

Also, sitting/viewing distance comes into play as well.

If going above 25" 16.9 then 2560x1440 is really needed imo, having a monitor with at least 100 PPI at arms length is what you want imo.

Depending on eyesight.

I have a 23" 1080p and I can't see the pixels, or they don't bother me, from a couple feet away.

Tbh, I could probably quite easily use a 27" 1080p screen.

It might also be because I'm oldschool, and don't dislike seeing pixels anyhow

e: it could also be my subconscious mind whispering "a 1440p 100hz screen is hella expensive, then you'd need a £600 gpu to drive it, and a new CPU..."

 

[HabUK]

Any ideas how a 390X would perform at 1440? Might upgrade my monitor later if I don't have to buy a new GPU to power it.

 

[Nexus18]

Depending on eyesight.

I have a 23" 1080p and I can't see the pixels, or they don't bother me, from a couple feet away.

Tbh, I could probably quite easily use a 27" 1080p screen.

It might also be because I'm oldschool, and don't dislike seeing pixels anyhow

e: it could also be my subconscious mind whispering "a 1440p 100hz screen is hella expensive, then you'd need a £600 gpu to drive it, and a new CPU..."

Well yes eye sight will play a part as well

I find 90-95ppi displays to be more than fine when sat at just over arms length away.

There are also other factors that contribute to "sharpness/clarity" i.e. contrast and more importantly the type of anti-glare finish a screen uses, the new lot of IPS panels have the best anti glare/matte finish I have ever seen, so light and little to no grain that I can see of, where as the majority of TN panels have a heavy matte finish so look a bit grainy in comparison. Glossy/glass is the best for IQ/clarity but only if you can control the lighting to avoid reflections etc.

And yup, imo, all the high end monitors are a rip off.

 

[titaniumx3]

24" 1080p to 27" 1440p makes a big difference in terms of desktop space and productivity. Using windows at 1080p just feels cramped, a lot like how it feels going between 1080p and 768p screens.

However, I think people are exaggerating the difference it makes in games. Sure, everything is sharper and small objects in games look more detailed, but I wouldn't call it a massive difference. Fact is, most games simply do not make use of all the extra resolution as the textures and polygon counts aren't usually high enough that the extra resolution matters significantly. Assuming both panels are of the same quality, I can happily play at 1080p without feeling like I am missing much when compared to 1440p.

If you are going from TN to IPS, 60hz to 144hz or fixed refresh to g-sync/freesync, then that is if course a different matter. High res gaming alone isn't that important in my opinion. Anything 1080p or above is good enough for 90% of games (currently).

 

[DazQ87]

I went from 24" 1080p 144Hz TN to 4k 24" IPS and then back down to 27" 1440p IPS 144Hz because I missed the refresh rate.

The jump from 1080p TN to 4k IPS was a huge increase in image quality. 1440p @ 27" is a good compromise, not as sharp as 4k, but still very decent pixels per inch.

Going from 4k 60hz to 1440p 144Hz with freesync was a brilliant decision though, the difference in smoothness is far more noticeable than the small drop in sharpness.