WoW in 4k vs. 1440p 200%RS?

[Auberdeen]

Trying to figure which would be more optimal for WoW on a 27", 4k or 1440p(2560x1440) at 200% render scale.

Read a green post on Blizz forum of how he prefered 1440p over 4k but didn't offer screen size or monitor specs.

1. Anyone tested comparison between the two side by side?

From what i'vee read 4k offers much more real-estate on the screen, but i'll only be playing with one monitor.

2. LCD vs LED vs TN vs IPS?

Thanks!

Asus z170p
Intel i5 6600k
Asus Geforce GTX 1060 6gb
Cryorig H7
Geil Potenza 16gb
Seasonic M12 620w

EDIT: well aware(now) that my 1060 can't perform at either 4k or 200% 1440p, and will be happily going with just 100% render scale

[tyrindor]

4K is significantly better than 1440p. I upgraded this year.

But your 1060 won't be able to handle it. Ideally you'd want a 1080 or the new Titan X Pascal that runs $1200 for 4K. If you can't afford that, then stick with 1440p.

[pansertjald]

First you will need a new GFX card

[Bareno]

Isn't a 1060 comparable to a 970? I know my 970 can't do 4k at more than 30 fps, without frame drops (though i think that's due to my mediocre i5 4670k. I would stick with 1440p, which is what I do, get 60 fps pretty much anywhere besides capitals, to which it goes down to ~40

EDIT: Looks like a 1060 benches about ~15% better then a 970 on average, but I don't think that's still enough to do 4k. Probably would need to get a 1080 at minimum.

[Chiliwing]

I have a samsung 4k and a ROG 1440p and the 4k is much better, i have 2 x 980GTX's and it plays fine on level 10 graphic settings.

[krunksmash]

1) you'r not getting 4K or 1440P@200% out of a 1060. that said 1440P with x2 MSAA will run fine on a GTX 1060.

2) All are LCD, LED is the type of back lighting, as for TN vs IPS go IPS. IPS offeres the best color reproduction and viewing angles. and with modern IPS panels the only thing TN did better, which was response time, has been matched by IPS.

- - - Updated - - -

id be very surprised if one couldn`t run 4k wow with a 1060card. personally I`m running 1440p through a 27` with an old 650boost with tons of fps to spare. its wow we are talking about here..

4k is a different beast. its just a arse of pixels to process. the 1060 just can't do it well.

[MrPaladinGuy]

Had a long post mostly typed out, but I decided to summarize.

Stick with 1440p on a 27", especially with your hardware.

When it comes to panel tech this is what matters; your budget, viewing angles, deep blacks, response time, refresh rate, input lag

During SoO in MoP I went from a 24" 1080p generic TN panel that I got for Cataclysm to one of those beloved Qnix QX2710 1440p 27" IPS displays, it's ruined TN for me. That TN panel is now a secondary display that I use for multitasking. I knew what I was getting into as what mostly bothered me was the viewing angle of my TN panel, although I was a bit surprised at how lacking the blacks were, but I'd change nothing, it was worth it for the color reproduction/vividness, resolution, pixel density, and viewing angles.

This was back when it was basically the only option for a 27" 1440p IPS display, now there are many options. They originally became popular because they were iirc the only IPS displays above 60hz (most could OC to 110, 96 was practically guaranteed, but profiles were needed to fix the gamut that lowered)

[Auberdeen]

1) you'r not getting 4K or 1440P@200% out of a 1060. that said 1440P with x2 MSAA will run fine on a GTX 1060.

2) All are LCD, LED is the type of back lighting, as for TN vs IPS go IPS. IPS offeres the best color reproduction and viewing angles. and with modern IPS panels the only thing TN did better, which was response time, has been matched by IPS.

- - - Updated - - -



4k is a different beast. its just a arse of pixels to process. the 1060 just can't do it well.

is this really true? by what metric? i was under the impression is was more than enough after doing quite a bit of research.

- - - Updated - - -

Had a long post mostly typed out, but I decided to summarize.

Stick with 1440p on a 27", especially with your hardware.

When it comes to panel tech this is what matters; your budget, viewing angles, deep blacks, response time, refresh rate, input lag

During SoO in MoP I went from a 24" 1080p generic TN panel that I got for Cataclysm to one of those beloved Qnix QX2710 1440p 27" IPS displays it's ruined TN for me. That TN panel is now a secondary display that I use for multitasking. I knew what I was getting into as what mostly bothered me was the viewing angle of my TN panel, although I was a biht surprised at how lacking the blacks were, but I'd change nothing, it was worth it for the color reproduction/vividness, resolution, pixel density, and viewing angles.

This was back when it was basically the only option for a 27" 1440p IPS display, now there are many options. They originally became popular because they were iirc the only IPS displays above 60hz (most could OC to 110, 96 was practically guaranteed, but profiles were needed to fix the gamut that lowered)

are they really that bad? just saw those recently on newegg. havent searched for a monitor in a few years so its all news to me tbh.

[Morgaith]

is this really true? by what metric? i was under the impression is was more than enough after doing quite a bit of research.

My 980ti goes below 60 fps running the game at absolute max settings at 1080p (cmaa + 8xmsaa, 200 scale and normal settings on max)

[Tauton]

1440p @ 200% = 14,745,600 "pixels" worth of work

4k = 8,294,400 pixels of work

1080p = 2,073,600 pixels of work

1440p@200% = 1.77x 4k = 7.08x 1080p

If you think a 1060 can handle 7 screens worth of 1080p, then best of luck =)

(remember to add the multiplier for AA you use too)

[krunksmash]

is this really true? by what metric? i was under the impression is was more than enough after doing quite a bit of research.

the 1060 is equal to a 970. the 970 drags at resolutions over 1440, the 1060 is the same way. by trying to even run 1440P @ 200% you are effectively trying to get it to push 5120 x 2880P or 5K resolution. even the mighty Titan X ( pascal ) will beg for mercy at that resolution its just too many pixels for the tiny 1060 to try and process.

[Auberdeen]

1440p @ 200% = 14,745,600 "pixels" worth of work

4k = 8,294,400 pixels of work

1080p = 2,073,600 pixels of work

1440p@200% = 1.77x 4k = 7.08x 1080p

If you think a 1060 can handle 7 screens worth of 1080p, then best of luck =)

(remember to add the multiplier for AA you use too)

are we talking at Ultra settings or just in general?

also im still learning the lingo, multiple for AA? you lost me thanks!

- - - Updated - - -

are we talking at Ultra settings or just in general?

also im still learning the lingo, multiple for AA? you lost me thanks!

what about at normal 100% render scale in 1440p for the 1060?

- - - Updated - - -

1440p @ 200% = 14,745,600 "pixels" worth of work

4k = 8,294,400 pixels of work

1080p = 2,073,600 pixels of work

1440p@200% = 1.77x 4k = 7.08x 1080p

If you think a 1060 can handle 7 screens worth of 1080p, then best of luck =)

(remember to add the multiplier for AA you use too)

what about normal 100% render scale with the 1060 at 1440p?

[Tauton]

Sorry - I meant that if you turn SSAA on (let's say 2x) it will then super sample (write the screen multiple times before squishing it back down to the resolution you want) twice, or four times (SSAA 4x) practically doubling or quadrupling the amount of effort the card is required to do.

A 1060 will be good for 1440p on ultra, 100% render, with x2 SSAA on - maybe 4x depending on your fps desires - it's not the most taxing of games but as krunk says, you're thinking a 1060 can handle settings that even a card 5x the prices will have issues with =) Set your bar lower and you will still be suitably impressed with how good the game can look and run.



ps - aww Auberdeen.... your quoting skills... :P That's why I rarely quote tbh, I mess it up too!!

[krunksmash]

are we talking at Ultra settings or just in general?

also im still learning the lingo, multiple for AA? you lost me thanks!

- - - Updated - - -



what about at normal 100% render scale in 1440p for the 1060?

the 1060 will be able to do 1440P @ 100% render scale just fine. just make sure to keep shadows on high or lower and keep SSAO turned off.

AA - this is a texture smoothing technology, the most common type used in wow MSAA takes the edges of textures and renders them at higher than display resolution before displaying them at display resolution, this allows for smoother edges on textures. this naturally add's load the the GPU.

lets take a system running at 1440P with MSAA x4 it will take the edges of the textures and render them at 4 times the pixel count or about 5K resolution. but if your already using 200% render scale then you are effectively telling the system to now render thoes edges at about 10K resolution.

This is a VERY basic explanation but its just to give you a general understanding.

[Tehterokkar]

You don't need Anti-aliasing at 1440p, unless you run +30'' monitor. At 27'' 1440p, there is 0 need for AA of any kind.

[Auberdeen]

Sorry - I meant that if you turn SSAA on (let's say 2x) it will then super sample (write the screen multiple times before squishing it back down to the resolution you want) twice, or four times (SSAA 4x) practically doubling or quadrupling the amount of effort the card is required to do.

A 1060 will be good for 1440p on ultra, 100% render, with x2 SSAA on - maybe 4x depending on your fps desires- it's not the most taxing of games but as krunk says, you're thinking a 1060 can handle settings that even a card 5x the prices will have issues with =) Set your bar lower and you will still be suitably impressed with how good the game can look and run.



ps - aww Auberdeen.... your quoting skills... :P That's why I rarely quote tbh, I mess it up too!!

how do I set that up, in the WoW System settings? thanks okay cool thats what i have been reading but almost had a HEAVY case of buyers remorse for a sec lol. and inwasnt sure about all the math of pixels thanks for explainin both of yall

hahaha especially when ur on an iphone! :P

- - - Updated - - -

You don't need Anti-aliasing at 1440p, unless you run +30'' monitor. At 27'' 1440p, there is 0 need for AA of any kind.

can you explain? so I wont need to tweak any settings in WoW system other than the 2560x1440 then?

- - - Updated - - -

the 1060 will be able to do 1440P @ 100% render scale just fine. just make sure to keep shadows on high or lower and keep SSAO turned off.

AA - this is a texture smoothing technology, the most common type used in wow MSAA takes the edges of textures and renders them at higher than display resolution before displaying them at display resolution, this allows for smoother edges on textures. this naturally add's load the the GPU.

lets take a system running at 1440P with MSAA x4 it will take the edges of the textures and render them at 4 times the pixel count or about 5K resolution. but if your already using 200% render scale then you are effectively telling the system to now render thoes edges at about 10K resolution.

This is a VERY basic explanation but its just to give you a general understanding.

thanks for the insight!

[Tehterokkar]

can you explain? so I wont need to tweak any settings in WoW system other than the 2560x1440 then?

Pixel density is so high on 1440p already that you won't see ANY difference between AA on or off.

[Rotomon]

4K is significantly better than 1440p. I upgraded this year.

But your 1060 won't be able to handle it. Ideally you'd want a 1080 or the new Titan X Pascal that runs $1200 for 4K. If you can't afford that, then stick with 1440p.

A 1070 runs 4k just fine. No less than 50 fps on ultra playing wow.

I have a Dell Ultrasharp Ultrawide 34 running at 3440x1440 on ultra and it plays flawless on a 1070. The only reason I upgraded to the 1080 was because why not.

[krunksmash]

Does render scale currently even do anything past 100%?

yes its renders the image at a higher ( or lower is below 100% ) resolution before drawing the image to your display at your display resolution. this can improve image quality when set above 100% or improve performance when set below 100%

[Asmekiel]

Pixel density is so high on 1440p already that you won't see ANY difference between AA on or off.

Not on a 27" screen. The FHD screen in my laptop has a higher DPI and there's definitely a need for AA.