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

[krunksmash]

Ah okay. So I probably wouldn't notice much just playing at 1080p ?

GeForce experience sometimes has settings that put it at 150-200%

150% would render the game at about 1440P 200% would be about 4K. the 1060 would be begging for you to put it out of its misery if you tried to do 200%. that say using the render scale can reduce the need to AA as it makes the image smoother my drawing the 1080P frame from a higher resolution image rather than drawing the frame from a 1080P image.

[Cilraaz]

A 1060 will be good for 1440p on ultra, 100% render, with x2 SSAA on - maybe 4x depending on your fps desires

SSAA is equivalent to using an increased render scale, so saying 100% render with SSAA on is a misnomer. SSAA 4x is 200% render scale. SSAA 4x is saying four times the screen resolution. 200% render scale is saying that it's rendering 200% more pixels in both directions, which is four times the screen resolution. Also, WoW doesn't have an SSAA 2x option.

[Tauton]

SSAA is equivalent to using an increased render scale, so saying 100% render with SSAA on is a misnomer. SSAA 4x is 200% render scale. SSAA 4x is saying four times the screen resolution. 200% render scale is saying that it's rendering 200% more pixels in both directions, which is four times the screen resolution. Also, WoW doesn't have an SSAA 2x option.

You are 100% correct, but it's not a misnomer as it is possible, in wow, to select SSAA 2x/4x/whatever AND change the render setting which is exactly what this topic was talking about at first. So I am saying to use 100% render and SSAA 2x (which, sure could be done the other way around - but my point is that in total, have 100% + SSAA 2x)

If 2x isn't an option then...... ok, but i'm sure people understand the point I was making.

[Cilraaz]

You are 100% correct, but it's not a misnomer as it is possible, in wow, to select SSAA 2x/4x/whatever AND change the render setting which is exactly what this topic was talking about at first. So I am saying to use 100% render and SSAA 2x (which, sure could be done the other way around - but my point is that in total, have 100% + SSAA 2x)

If 2x isn't an option then...... ok, but i'm sure people understand the point I was making.

You physically can't use 100% render scale and SSAA in WoW. If you set SSAA 4x and then change render scale to 100%, you've undone setting the SSAA option.

[Tauton]

You physically can't use 100% render scale and SSAA in WoW. If you set SSAA 4x and then change render scale to 100%, you've undone setting the SSAA option.

Hah, well I never.... I only use MSAA & 100% so was unaware of that =) This is why things in practice > things in theory :P

[Artorius]

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

2560x1440 at 200% is literally 5120x2880 which is heavier than what you're calling 4K. You don't do it satisfactorily with your 1060.

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

That's only the resolution. "Better" or "worse" aren't exactly good terms to use in this case. Higher resolution can give you more real state or denser pixel density depending on panel size. Having higher pixel density means that things will look more detailed and will give you a better experience to some extent. But quality in general when it comes to displays are more noticeable in other areas like black levels and color reproduction.

2. LCD vs LED vs TN vs IPS?

LCD is the panel technology. LED is the backlight used in the current LCD displays unless you go professional with GB-r or CCFL for higher gamut but you won't.
TN and IPS are different LCD panel types, and making it simple IPS gives you better off-angle performance due to better viewing angles. No there isn't a color reproduction difference from a dead center between them if the display isn't big enough for its edges to be in weird angles to your eyes.

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

108.79 for the default 27" QHD isn't so high. It's literally almost the same as FHD at 23.6".

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%

It works as an extremely expensive AA. It renders it bigger and then downscales it to fit the pixels so you can get smoother picture.

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

Thanks.

[Asmekiel]

Thanks.

I should probably add that it's a 17.3" laptop, so a DPI of 127? MSAA x2 is enough for most people, I still prefer x4 though. In normal situations while moving around you won't notice a difference, but I also like smooth edges while standing still.
On a 24" 1920x1200 screen I use x8 at least.

[Bryntrollian]

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.

A 4670k is mediocre ?

[Strawberry]

With those specs you should forget even 1080p at 200% RS, much less 1440p and 4k.
100% RS? Sure, 1080p is fine, 1440p don't expect constant 60 fps, 4k not going to happen with GTX 1060 unless you lower details (who wants to do that?)

I'm running at 4k with 980Ti SLI and depending on AA I get about steady 55-60 fps. Running 200% RS at 4k is about 35 FPS, which is unacceptable. And a single 1060 is weaker than 980Ti.

[coprax]

I'd suggest you use 8xMSAA with A2C enabled, it has a much better performance than SSAAx4, which is total overkill at 1440p.

- - - Updated - - -

I'm running at 4k with 980Ti SLI and depending on AA I get about steady 55-60 fps. Running 200% RS at 4k is about 35 FPS, which is unacceptable. And a single 1060 is weaker than 980Ti.

I tried it (gtx1060) with 3360x2100 @200% (6720x4200), it gave me about 28fps in SW at Setting 10.^^

[Auberdeen]

With those specs you should forget even 1080p at 200% RS, much less 1440p and 4k.
100% RS? Sure, 1080p is fine, 1440p don't expect constant 60 fps, 4k not going to happen with GTX 1060 unless you lower details (who wants to do that?)

I'm running at 4k with 980Ti SLI and depending on AA I get about steady 55-60 fps. Running 200% RS at 4k is about 35 FPS, which is unacceptable. And a single 1060 is weaker than 980Ti.

currently running 200% RS at Ultra without a hitch everywhere on 1080p. smooth as butter covered silk

realized a lot of people just dont know what they are talking about and only speak from "benchmarks" and don't really know the honest truth, kind of funny to watch it unravel on this thread

to those who have actually tested and have purchased the hardware and fiddled around, I thank you.

- - - Updated - - -

I'd suggest you use 8xMSAA with A2C enabled, it has a much better performance than SSAAx4, which is total overkill at 1440p.

- - - Updated - - -



I tried it (gtx1060) with 3360x2100 @200% (6720x4200), it gave me about 28fps in SW at Setting 10.^^

in WoW settings or GPU settings?

[Tiberria]

If you just turn Shadows and Liquid down to "Good", you can run at 4k with pretty much everything else maxed on a 980 Ti. Those 2 settings are far too expensive for what they actually offer anyway.

[coprax]

currently running 200% RS at Ultra without a hitch everywhere on 1080p. smooth as butter covered silk

realized a lot of people just dont know what they are talking about and only speak from "benchmarks" and don't really know the honest truth, kind of funny to watch it unravel on this thread

to those who have actually tested and have purchased the hardware and fiddled around, I thank you.

- - - Updated - - -




in WoW settings or GPU settings?

I meant Wow graphic preset 10

Resolution via nvidia DSR + supersampling in wow.

[Strawberry]

currently running 200% RS at Ultra without a hitch everywhere on 1080p. smooth as butter covered silk

realized a lot of people just dont know what they are talking about and only speak from "benchmarks" and don't really know the honest truth, kind of funny to watch it unravel on this thread

to those who have actually tested and have purchased the hardware and fiddled around, I thank you.

- - - Updated - - -




in WoW settings or GPU settings?

With what card? 1060? Because you're either lying about graphic quality or are not using a 1060.
Or maybe you think steady 30 fps is smooth. Who knows, maybe you're one of those console peasants playing WoW since it doesn't exist on consoles.

[coprax]

With what card? 1060? Because you're either lying about graphic quality or are not using a 1060.
Or maybe you think steady 30 fps is smooth. Who knows, maybe you're one of those console peasants playing WoW since it doesn't exist on consoles.

of course it's possible to have ~60fps at 4k with a 1060 in wow.
If you are falling below that it's mostly because of the cpu. (try an invasion, try dalaran under invasion, try any crowed city and look at gpu utilization, will not be at 100%)

[Peroxidex]

currently running 200% RS at Ultra without a hitch everywhere on 1080p. smooth as butter covered silk

realized a lot of people just dont know what they are talking about and only speak from "benchmarks" and don't really know the honest truth, kind of funny to watch it unravel on this thread

to those who have actually tested and have purchased the hardware and fiddled around, I thank you.

The funny thing is, there's only one or two reputable review sites that benchmark WoW so I'm unsure where all these people are allegedly viewing them.

"Smooth as butter" with no mention of FPS? Who else wants to bet they have vsync on? 30 fps

[moremana]

With what card? 1060? Because you're either lying about graphic quality or are not using a 1060.
Or maybe you think steady 30 fps is smooth. Who knows, maybe you're one of those console peasants playing WoW since it doesn't exist on consoles.

This just made me laugh.

My wife has a 1060 on a 25" Acer 1440p and running it fine on preset 10 with shadows and liquid set to good, looks amazing and 99% stays above 60fps, and thats with a Xeon 1231V3 CPU

Stop calling people liars until you actually have tested what he has as you have no idea.

[Mythbredor]

Let's keep the discussion civil and don't call eachother names.

[Crunga]

You are 100% correct, but it's not a misnomer as it is possible, in wow, to select SSAA 2x/4x/whatever AND change the render setting which is exactly what this topic was talking about at first. So I am saying to use 100% render and SSAA 2x (which, sure could be done the other way around - but my point is that in total, have 100% + SSAA 2x)

If 2x isn't an option then...... ok, but i'm sure people understand the point I was making.

Since you kinda seem to know what you're talking about, do you know if it makes a difference going over MSAA (2x Color/Depth) / 200% Render Scale when playing at 1080p?

[Strawberry]

This just made me laugh.

My wife has a 1060 on a 25" Acer 1440p and running it fine on preset 10 with shadows and liquid set to good, looks amazing and 99% stays above 60fps, and thats with a Xeon 1231V3 CPU

Stop calling people liars until you actually have tested what he has as you have no idea.

Dude, you realize we're talking about 200% RESOLUTION SCALING?
That's not 1440p, but twice that resolution. And your wife is not even able to run maxed out 1440p on 1060, I wonder how that card would do with more than twice the requirements from 200% RS, lol.
Maybe I should not call people liars but illiterates.

of course it's possible to have ~60fps at 4k with a 1060 in wow.
If you are falling below that it's mostly because of the cpu. (try an invasion, try dalaran under invasion, try any crowed city and look at gpu utilization, will not be at 100%)

Yup, if you cut down the details to like near minimum.
I have 2½ more horsepower in my box compared to a single 1060 (which is comparable to a 980), and I sometimes fall below 60 fps. That is with a 6700k cpu clocked to 4.7ghz.
I also run 4k resolution.

Infracted - Mythbredor