• Competitor rules

    Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.

Max Res or maxed out

vorticalspace

vorticalspace

vorticalspace

Associate
Joined
10 Jan 2010
Posts
480
Hi All

Just been messing about on Just Cause 2.

With game fully maxed out on all advanced graphics settings i'm getting approx 32 fps at 1280 x 1024 with OC 260GTX.

Same but at 1024 x 768 getting approx 45fps

With 1024 x 768 far more playable, smoother etc

Now, i am getting on a bit, but to my eyes, there isn't much discernible difference between the 2 resolutions on my 19" monitor.

Question:-
In general, is it better to play at native res & reduce graphical detail (as most people seem to do) or reduce res & max out detail.

I appreciate most everyone on this forum are probably playing at 1080p or more but when your sat approx 2 feet from the monitor, I personally cannot frame both sides of the screen without moving my eyes. (as stated could be my age):D:D
 
If you can't tell the difference then just do what you're happy with, I personally don't like dropping down res so the details have to be turned down.
 
Depends what monitor your using to be fair. If its a CRT then you won't be really able to tell a different but if its a TFT you definately can. Like Raven said, I personally would also rather lower detail levels on my 22inch sammy (1920x1080 native) then lower the res, unless the res can be aspect locked (instead of stretched like ****)
 
It's a matter of personal preference I suppose.

If I can;t play the game at native res with acceptable framerates, then I usually put it to one side until I upgrade :p I will often turn down the odd detail setting though - particularly when there are just one or two things that really clobber the framerate.

But yeah... framerate is key. If you can't play at a decent framerate, then do something to improve it :)
 
I'd turn down a couple options, off the top of my head I can't remember what options exactly but I'd expect a 260gtx to be MUCH faster than that. My 5850 overclocked, yes its a much faster card but it can average pretty close to 100fps with vsync off(vsync on kills performance for some reason in the game) at 1920x1080, which frankly is hugely higher power requirement than 1280x1024. Have you got the crazy Cuda water enabled, I can't enable it on AMD but wouldn't be remotely surprised if that killed performance.

Remember though that a lot of monitors, especially computer monitors, put basically no effort at all into the scaling capability of a screen, other monitors put in higher quality chips that scale up images much better, some monitors look truly awful out of native res and others look very passable, its generally TV's as opposed to monitors that do much better in that area.

You can always set up 1:1 scaling options somewhere or another and play with black borders on a lower res on screens that look horribly stretched when in non native resolutions.

Basically with all games its up to the user to find settings they are most comftable with, and also to keep in mind the highest settings aren't necessarily the best, especially with new features you often get awful performance and reduced IQ. Metro 2033, one of the newest games has DOF and Tesselation, DOF rapes performance and looks horrible, trying to replicate a realistic field of vision and blurryness outside it, in reality it halves performances, looks like turd and is MUCH better turned off, tesselation drops 10-15fps off your speed, increase IQ, but to a degree you will find incredibly hard to actually notice, its a barely used effect that in real world game play(ie playing the game rather than stopping and slowly starting at everything to find the two noticeable pixels that are better) that the performance loss isn't even close to worth it. The one other game I always remember is the first FEAR game, soft shadows, killed performance, they looked completely awful in general, reduced IQ for reduced performance, yet the number of people who will turn it on just because its the "top settings" option is hilarious.

I'm not refering directly to the CUDA water in JC2, I haven't seen it in action its supposed to look better, but better + unplayable is rarely a good option when slightly less bad + smooth is a possibility.

Maybe double check the profile for the game, maybe its been accidentally set to use too much AA and so is running badly. I still think that 1280x1024 should run significantly better than you're seeing.
 
Hi drunkenmaster

I was running JC2 with everything set to max inc AA & AF.
Tried with V-sync on & off and actually seemed smoother with it on even though no where near refresh rate.

Personally for me, I would rather max everything out and see the game as the developer intended with all the latest DX stuff implemented although I appreciate that increased AA/AF is a subjective issue and especially in the case of AA, a performance killer.

for a 19" monitor, the NEC 90 is good quality and flicking backwards & forwards between the 1280 x 1024, 1024 x 768 I was hard pushed to see any real difference in terms of sharpness with scaling/aspect ratio spot on.
Even tried at 800 x 600 and to be honest, it didn't look that bad:)

having said all this, I will be upgrading shortly and probably going down the GTX470/22" 1080P route.
The main reason being DX11 and exploring the improved graphical possibilities it can bring to games.
 
I was running JC2 on my 5770 (similar power to your 260) maxed out at 1440x900 with 2xAA. Obviously CUDA water and that cuda filter were off. Switching to 4xAA really made my framerate take a dive though :O

I'd turn down AA, and turn off stuff like CUDA water if I were you :)
 
JC2 even with an overclocked 480 will dip well below 40 fps at certain points, so I enable 4xAA, I disable high res shadows, SSAO, point light specular, bokeh filter and cuda water, and TBH the games looks no worse for it.
 
I could live with reduced AA but for me, CUDA water adds to the overall experience.

Playing video games is about total immersion(not in CUDA water though:D)
IMHO, providing your not playing a slide show, realism should take precedence over massive but unnesessary FPS.

What is the point in buying the latest GPU's and then dumbing down the experience:confused:
 
Because I would prefer to play with a smooth framerate rather than have features enabled that kill fps for not much eye candy, I could enable all max settings on an 8800GT but play at 20 sub fps, it's not fun.
 
RavenXXX2 said:
Because I would prefer to play with a smooth framerate rather than have features enabled that kill fps for not much eye candy, I could enable all max settings on an 8800GT but play at 20 sub fps, it's not fun.
Click to expand...

I agree with this, slight changes to improve performance in a game reduces very little eye candy.
 
Well, I'd definitely sacrifice AA for a higher resolution. There aren't many LCDs that display non-native resolution with a sharp and crisp image. I can't understand why you'd choose 1024x768 8xAA over 1280x1024 4xAA.
 
Mr Krugga said:
Well, I'd definitely sacrifice AA for a higher resolution. There aren't many LCDs that display non-native resolution with a sharp and crisp image. I can't understand why you'd choose 1024x768 8xAA over 1280x1024 4xAA.
Click to expand...

Some people love AA, i for one notice practically zilch difference between 8 and 4x AA.
 
justcause22010091011253.jpg


justcause22010091011261.jpg


Top screen maxed out with 4xAA

Bottom screen with 4xAA and the settings I mentioned disabled. Double FPS and TBH the IQ difference is not too apparent.
 
Mr Krugga said:
Well, I'd definitely sacrifice AA for a higher resolution. There aren't many LCDs that display non-native resolution with a sharp and crisp image. I can't understand why you'd choose 1024x768 8xAA over 1280x1024 4xAA.
Click to expand...

I need to experiment with the AA situation and as regards to the res, purely my observations based upon my monitor and what for me seems to be a fair trade off in terms of performance vs IQ

I have observed that sometimes, high AA can make certain games look too clinical and not gritty enough if you know what I mean.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom